Re: [RFC, PATCH] avoid some atomics in open()/close() for monothreaded processes

Eric Dumazet <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Goal : Avoid some locking/unlocking 'struct files_struct'->file_lock for mono 
> threaded processes.
> 
> We define files_multithreaded() function .
> 
> static inline int files_multithreaded(const struct files_struct *files)
> {
>         return sizeof(files->file_lock) > 0 && atomic_read(&files->count) > 1;
> }

That's bascially sizeof(spinlock_t).  That's architecture dependent and
varies wildly according to the day of week.

It _might_ work in all situations - probably you checked that.  But I still
wouldn't do it because it might break in the future.  Let's be explicit and
stick the appropriate ifdefs in there.

I'd also consider renaming it to files_shared() - processes are
multithreaded, not data structures.

Once you're done with that we should change fget_light() and fput_light() to
use this helper.  Separate patch.

-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [RFC, PATCH] avoid some atomics in open()/close() for monothreaded processes
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: More than 8 CPUs detected and CONFIG_X86_PC cannot handle it on 2.6.16-rc6
    • From: Nathan Lynch <[email protected]>
  • Re: More than 8 CPUs detected and CONFIG_X86_PC cannot handle it on 2.6.16-rc6
    • From: Shaohua Li <[email protected]>
  • Re: More than 8 CPUs detected and CONFIG_X86_PC cannot handle it on 2.6.16-rc6
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH] No need to protect current->group_info in sys_getgroups(), in_group_p() and in_egroup_p()
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH] Use unsigned int types for a faster bsearch
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH] Use __read_mostly on some hot fs variables
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
  • [RFC, PATCH] avoid some atomics in open()/close() for monothreaded processes
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [RFC PATCH 15/35] subarch support for controlling interrupt delivery
• Next by Date: [RFC PATCH 25/35] Add Xen time abstractions
• Previous by thread: [RFC, PATCH] avoid some atomics in open()/close() for monothreaded processes
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC, PATCH] avoid some atomics in open()/close() for monothreaded processes
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]