Re: [PATCH 3/4] block: cleanup bio_endio

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 05:34:52PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Replace the while loop that unecessarily checks for a NULL bio in the fast
> path witch a simple goto loop.

s/witch/with/ ?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> ---
>  block/bio.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
> index 67e51ac..e4682ec 100644
> --- a/block/bio.c
> +++ b/block/bio.c
> @@ -1745,26 +1745,25 @@ static inline bool bio_remaining_done(struct bio *bio)
>   **/
>  void bio_endio(struct bio *bio)
>  {
> -	while (bio) {
> -		if (unlikely(!bio_remaining_done(bio)))
> -			break;
> +again:
> +	if (unlikely(!bio_remaining_done(bio)))
> +		return;
>  
> -		/*
> -		 * Need to have a real endio function for chained bios,
> -		 * otherwise various corner cases will break (like stacking
> -		 * block devices that save/restore bi_end_io) - however, we want
> -		 * to avoid unbounded recursion and blowing the stack. Tail call
> -		 * optimization would handle this, but compiling with frame
> -		 * pointers also disables gcc's sibling call optimization.
> -		 */
> -		if (bio->bi_end_io == bio_chain_endio) {
> -			bio = __bio_chain_endio(bio);
> -		} else {
> -			if (bio->bi_end_io)
> -				bio->bi_end_io(bio);
> -			bio = NULL;
> -		}
> +	/*
> +	 * Need to have a real endio function for chained bios, otherwise
> +	 * various corner cases will break (like stacking block devices that
> +	 * save/restore bi_end_io) - however, we want to avoid unbounded
> +	 * recursion and blowing the stack. Tail call optimization would
> +	 * handle this, but compiling with frame pointers also disables
> +	 * gcc's sibling call optimization.
> +	 */
> +	if (bio->bi_end_io == bio_chain_endio) {
> +		bio = __bio_chain_endio(bio);
> +		goto again;
>  	}
> +
> +	if (bio->bi_end_io)
> +		bio->bi_end_io(bio);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(bio_endio);
>  
> -- 
> 2.1.4
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Just out of curiosity, do you have any numbers for this change?

-- 
Johannes Thumshirn                                          Storage
jthumshirn@xxxxxxx                                +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux