Ming Lei <ming....@canonical.com> writes:

> Each bio is always submitted to block device one by one,
> so it isn't necessary to increase the bio refcount by one
> each time with holding dio->bio_lock.

This patch opens up a race where a completion event can come in before
the refcount for the dio is incremented, resulting in refcount going
negative.  I don't think that will actually cause problems, but it
certainly is ugly, and I doubt it was the intended design.

Before I dig into this any further, would you care to comment on why you
went down this path?  Did you see spinlock contention here?  And was
there a resultant performance improvement for some benchmark with the
patch applied?

Cheers,
Jeff

> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming....@canonical.com>
> ---
>  fs/direct-io.c |   27 +++++++++++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/direct-io.c b/fs/direct-io.c
> index 6fb00e3..57b8e73 100644
> --- a/fs/direct-io.c
> +++ b/fs/direct-io.c
> @@ -79,6 +79,8 @@ struct dio_submit {
>       get_block_t *get_block;         /* block mapping function */
>       dio_submit_t *submit_io;        /* IO submition function */
>  
> +     long    submitted_bio;
> +
>       loff_t logical_offset_in_bio;   /* current first logical block in bio */
>       sector_t final_block_in_bio;    /* current final block in bio + 1 */
>       sector_t next_block_for_io;     /* next block to be put under IO,
> @@ -121,7 +123,7 @@ struct dio {
>       int is_async;                   /* is IO async ? */
>       bool defer_completion;          /* defer AIO completion to workqueue? */
>       int io_error;                   /* IO error in completion path */
> -     unsigned long refcount;         /* direct_io_worker() and bios */
> +     long refcount;                  /* direct_io_worker() and bios */
>       struct bio *bio_list;           /* singly linked via bi_private */
>       struct task_struct *waiter;     /* waiting task (NULL if none) */
>  
> @@ -383,14 +385,9 @@ dio_bio_alloc(struct dio *dio, struct dio_submit *sdio,
>  static inline void dio_bio_submit(struct dio *dio, struct dio_submit *sdio)
>  {
>       struct bio *bio = sdio->bio;
> -     unsigned long flags;
>  
>       bio->bi_private = dio;
>  
> -     spin_lock_irqsave(&dio->bio_lock, flags);
> -     dio->refcount++;
> -     spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dio->bio_lock, flags);
> -
>       if (dio->is_async && dio->rw == READ)
>               bio_set_pages_dirty(bio);
>  
> @@ -403,15 +400,26 @@ static inline void dio_bio_submit(struct dio *dio, 
> struct dio_submit *sdio)
>       sdio->bio = NULL;
>       sdio->boundary = 0;
>       sdio->logical_offset_in_bio = 0;
> +     sdio->submitted_bio++;
>  }
>  
>  /*
>   * Release any resources in case of a failure
>   */
> -static inline void dio_cleanup(struct dio *dio, struct dio_submit *sdio)
> +static inline void dio_cleanup(struct dio *dio, struct dio_submit *sdio,
> +             bool commit_refcount)
>  {
> +     unsigned long flags;
> +
>       while (sdio->head < sdio->tail)
>               page_cache_release(dio->pages[sdio->head++]);
> +
> +     if (!commit_refcount)
> +             return;
> +
> +     spin_lock_irqsave(&dio->bio_lock, flags);
> +     dio->refcount += (sdio->submitted_bio + 1);
> +     spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dio->bio_lock, flags);
>  }
>  
>  /*
> @@ -1215,7 +1223,6 @@ do_blockdev_direct_IO(int rw, struct kiocb *iocb, 
> struct inode *inode,
>       dio->i_size = i_size_read(inode);
>  
>       spin_lock_init(&dio->bio_lock);
> -     dio->refcount = 1;
>  
>       sdio.iter = iter;
>       sdio.final_block_in_request =
> @@ -1234,7 +1241,7 @@ do_blockdev_direct_IO(int rw, struct kiocb *iocb, 
> struct inode *inode,
>  
>       retval = do_direct_IO(dio, &sdio, &map_bh);
>       if (retval)
> -             dio_cleanup(dio, &sdio);
> +             dio_cleanup(dio, &sdio, false);
>  
>       if (retval == -ENOTBLK) {
>               /*
> @@ -1267,7 +1274,7 @@ do_blockdev_direct_IO(int rw, struct kiocb *iocb, 
> struct inode *inode,
>        * It is possible that, we return short IO due to end of file.
>        * In that case, we need to release all the pages we got hold on.
>        */
> -     dio_cleanup(dio, &sdio);
> +     dio_cleanup(dio, &sdio, true);
>  
>       /*
>        * All block lookups have been performed. For READ requests
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to