Hi,
Thank you checking code...
Pekka Enberg wrote:
Hi,
:
snip
This patch enables using hint information on scanning dir.
It achieves excellent performance with "ls -l" for over 1000 entries.
* fat-dirscan-with-hint_3.patch for linux 2.6.13
fs/fat/dir.c | 130 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
fs/fat/inode.c | 13 ++++
include/linux/msdos_fs.h | 2
3 files changed, 137 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Signed-off-by: Hiroyuki Machida <[email protected]> for CELF
* modified files
--- linux-2.6.13/fs/fat/dir.c 2005-08-29 08:41:01.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-2.6.13-work/fs/fat/dir.c 2005-08-31 13:48:01.001119437 +0900
@@ -201,6 +201,88 @@ fat_shortname2uni(struct nls_table *nls,
* Return values: negative -> error, 0 -> not found, positive -> found,
* value is the total amount of slots, including the shortname entry.
*/
+
+#define FAT_SCAN_SHIFT 4 /* 2x8 way scan hints */
+#define FAT_SCAN_NWAY (1<<FAT_SCAN_SHIFT)
+
+inline
+static int hint_allocate(struct inode *dir)
+{
+ loff_t *hints;
+ int err = 0;
+
+ if (!MSDOS_I(dir)->scan_hints) {
Please consider moving this check to callers. Conditional allocation
makes this bit strange API-wise. Or alternatively, give
hint_allocate() a better name.
How about hint_allocate_conditional() ?
--- linux-2.6.13/fs/fat/inode.c 2005-08-29 08:41:01.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-2.6.13-work/fs/fat/inode.c 2005-08-31 12:59:54.292274060 +0900
@@ -242,6 +242,8 @@ static int fat_fill_inode(struct inode *
inode->i_version++;
inode->i_generation = get_seconds();
+ init_MUTEX(&MSDOS_I(inode)->scan_lock);
+ MSDOS_I(inode)->scan_hints = 0;
Please use NULL.
Ok,
if ((de->attr & ATTR_DIR) && !IS_FREE(de->name)) {
inode->i_generation &= ~1;
inode->i_mode = MSDOS_MKMODE(de->attr,
@@ -345,6 +347,15 @@ static void fat_delete_inode(struct inod
static void fat_clear_inode(struct inode *inode)
{
struct msdos_sb_info *sbi = MSDOS_SB(inode->i_sb);
+ loff_t *hints;
+
+ down(&MSDOS_I(inode)->scan_lock);
+ hints = (MSDOS_I(inode)->scan_hints);
Pleas drop redundant parenthesis.
Ok,
+ if (hints) {
+ MSDOS_I(inode)->scan_hints = NULL;
+ }
+ up(&MSDOS_I(inode)->scan_lock);
+ kfree(hints);
Why can't you do kfree() under scan_lock?
Just try to minimize blocked period.
@@ -1011,6 +1022,8 @@ static int fat_read_root(struct inode *i
struct msdos_sb_info *sbi = MSDOS_SB(sb);
int error;
+ init_MUTEX(&MSDOS_I(inode)->scan_lock);
+ MSDOS_I(inode)->scan_hints = 0;
Please use NULL here.
Ok.
Pekka
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Hiroyuki Machida [email protected]
SSW Dept. HENC, Sony Corp.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |