On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 09:04:09AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Fri 07-10-16 15:08:56, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > DAX radix tree locking currently locks entries based on the unique
> > combination of the 'mapping' pointer and the pgoff_t 'index' for the entry.
> > This works for PTEs, but as we move to PMDs we will need to have all the
> > offsets within the range covered by the PMD to map to the same bit lock.
> > To accomplish this, for ranges covered by a PMD entry we will instead lock
> > based on the page offset of the beginning of the PMD entry. The 'mapping'
> > pointer is still used in the same way.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The patch looks good to me. You can add:
>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
>
> Just one thing which IMO deserves a comment below:
>
> > @@ -448,9 +460,12 @@ restart:
> > }
> >
> > void dax_wake_mapping_entry_waiter(struct address_space *mapping,
> > - pgoff_t index, bool wake_all)
> > + pgoff_t index, void *entry, bool wake_all)
> > {
> > - wait_queue_head_t *wq = dax_entry_waitqueue(mapping, index);
> > + struct exceptional_entry_key key;
> > + wait_queue_head_t *wq;
> > +
> > + wq = dax_entry_waitqueue(mapping, index, entry, &key);
>
> So I believe we should comment above this function that the 'entry' it gets
> may be invalid by the time it gets it (we call it without tree_lock held so
> the passed entry may be changed in the radix tree as we work) but we use it
> only to find appropriate waitqueue where tasks sleep waiting for that old
> entry to unlock so we indeed wake up all tasks we need.
Added, thanks for the suggestion.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>