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

[Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>]

Andrew Morton a écrit :
> Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com> 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.

I used sizeof(files->file_lock) instead of sizeof(spinlock_t) because I found 
it more explicit , while not using ugly ifdefs.

> 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.

Thanks for the feedback, I will redo the patch and test it on various 
platforms before resubmit (including performance data :) )

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

Hum... this discussion is not relevant with fget_light() unless I mistaken.

Nowadays, this function doesnt take spinlock thanks to RCU

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/