On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:49:37PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Christoph, can you give some kind of estimate for the overhead that
> adding this locking in XFS actually costs in practice?
I don't know any real life measurements, but in terms of implementation
the over head is:
a) taking a the rw_semaphore in shared mode for every buffered read
b) taking the slightly slower exclusive rw_semaphore for buffered writes
instead of the plain mutex
On the other hand it significantly simplifies the locking for direct
I/O and allows parallel direct I/O writers.
> And does XFS
> provide any kind of consistency guarantees if the reads/write overlap
> spans multiple pages? I assume the answer to that is no, correct?
The answer is yes as the lock is taken globally on the inode.
--
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>