On Thu, 2018-10-04 at 11:45 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 10:09:41PM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-09-21 at 18:05 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote:
> > > tur_devt() locks ct->lock. However, it is ocassionally called
> > > while
> > > ct->lock is already locked. In reality, there is no reason why we
> > > need
> > > to lock all the accesses to ct->devt. The tur checker only needs
> > > to
> > > write to this variable one time, when it first gets the file
> > > descripter
> > > that it is checking. It also never uses ct->devt directly.
> > > Instead,
> > > it
> > > always graps the major and minor, and turns them into a string.
> > > This
> > > patch changes ct->devt into that string, and sets it in
> > > libcheck_init()
> > > when it is first initializing the checker context. After that,
> > > ct-
> > > > devt
> > >
> > > is only ever read.
> >
> > I like the lock removal a lot, but not so much the conversion into
> > a
> > string. Why not keep the dev_t?
>
> Because we will simply convert it into a string every time we use it,
> instead of doing the work one time. It's 24 more bytes in the
> tur_checker_context, but the code is easier to read, and we're not
> doing
> the same work again and again.
Well, IMO snprintf(buf, N, "%d:%d", major(x), minor(x)) is not _that_
much work, and it looks a lot cleaner, to me at least.
But OK, I'm not insisting on this. So, if you re-post, I'm going to ack
the patch.
My thought for long term is is this actually this: ct->dev_t is only
needed for creating messages to be stored in the checker->message
string, which I don't like either.
Why don't we replace the "message" field with an "int msgid", and
add a
char* (*get_message)(int msgid)
to the checker API?
msgid could actually be another "uatomic" field. We could even go one
step further, create a field for the checker status in struct checker,
and use like one byte for the general path status and the rest of the
field for the msgid, which usually represents just some checker-
specific extra information wrt the status.
> >
> > Or maybe even easier, the other way around: why don't we make it a
> > char* and simply set checker->dev_t = &pp->dev_t?
>
> The whole reason we have tur_checker_context->holders is that it's
> possible for a path to be removed (or orphaned) while the thread is
> still running. The tur_checker_context needs to keep all its own
> storage, so that it never as to worry about pointing to freed memory.
Yeah, I got that meanwhile, as posted before. Sorry.
Martin
--
Dr. Martin Wilck <mwilck@xxxxxxxx>, Tel. +49 (0)911 74053 2107
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
