Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] radix priority search tree - objrmap complexity fix

[Hugh Dickins]

On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> 
> Here a further update for xfs:
> 
> --- sles/fs/xfs/linux/xfs_vnode.h.~1~	2004-03-29 18:33:20.047028592 +0200
> +++ sles/fs/xfs/linux/xfs_vnode.h	2004-03-29 19:02:37.101915648 +0200
> @@ -601,8 +601,8 @@ static __inline__ void vn_flagclr(struct
>   * Some useful predicates.
>   */
>  #define VN_MAPPED(vp)	\
> -	(!list_empty(&(LINVFS_GET_IP(vp)->i_mapping->i_mmap)) || \
> -	(!list_empty(&(LINVFS_GET_IP(vp)->i_mapping->i_mmap_shared))))
> +	(!prio_tree_empty(&(LINVFS_GET_IP(vp)->i_mapping->i_mmap)) || \
> +	(!prio_tree_empty(&(LINVFS_GET_IP(vp)->i_mapping->i_mmap_shared))))
>  #define VN_CACHED(vp)	(LINVFS_GET_IP(vp)->i_mapping->nrpages)
>  #define VN_DIRTY(vp)	mapping_tagged(LINVFS_GET_IP(vp)->i_mapping, \
>  					PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY)

Needs also to check
	!list_empty(&(LINVFS_GET_IP(vp)->i_mapping->i_mmap_nonlinear))

Various arches need a similar conversion too (and use page_mapping(page)
rather than page->mapping: see arch and include/asm in my anobjrmap 3/6).

Those arches which do more than test list_empty (now prio_tree_empty),
arm and parisc (I think that's all): look as if they can take full
advantage of the prio tree; and I hope we can ignore the nonlinears
in those cases - if a page is mapped in a nonlinear vma it may suffer
from  D-cache aliasing inconsistencies if also mapped elsewhere in
that user address space, never mind.  Is that reasonable?

> and really some other bigger tree needs this part too (not a mainline
> issue).
> 
> --- sles/fs/xfs/dmapi/dmapi_xfs.c.~1~	2004-03-29 18:33:03.781501328 +0200
> +++ sles/fs/xfs/dmapi/dmapi_xfs.c	2004-03-29 18:58:57.754261560 +0200
> @@ -228,17 +228,21 @@ prohibited_mr_events(
>  	struct address_space *mapping = LINVFS_GET_IP(vp)->i_mapping;
>  	int prohibited = (1 << DM_EVENT_READ);
>  	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> +	struct prio_tree_iter iter;
>  
>  	if (!VN_MAPPED(vp))
>  		return 0;
>  
>  #if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,0)
>  	down(&mapping->i_shared_sem);
> -	list_for_each_entry(vma, &mapping->i_mmap_shared, shared) {
> +	vma = __vma_prio_tree_first(&mapping->i_mmap_shared, &iter, 0, ULONG_MAX);
> +	while (vma) {
>  		if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_DENYWRITE)) {
>  			prohibited |= (1 << DM_EVENT_WRITE);
>  			break;
>  		}
> +
> +		vma = __vma_prio_tree_next(vma, &mapping->i_mmap_shared, &iter, 0, ULONG_MAX);
>  	}
>  	up(&mapping->i_shared_sem);
>  #else

This looks horrid (not your change, the original), and would need to look
at nonlinears too; but I thought this was what i_writecount < 0 is for?

Hugh

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/