Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210312122531.2717093-1-daeho43@gmail.com> <YEtg8U7whCVV2tQt@kroah.com>
 <CACOAw_zhZ0OgT-KCBmD_H6_U=CZCNY44D-ojH2AZah2cbAvdAQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <YEt00vJ6oVfoRjSJ@kroah.com> <CACOAw_yjyy+58B=RawAaQO98NQB43roZOv4sq5313sFHN1myXQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACOAw_yjyy+58B=RawAaQO98NQB43roZOv4sq5313sFHN1myXQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Daeho Jeong <daeho43@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Mar 2021 23:42:04 +0900
Message-ID: <CACOAw_wipL_SHyKp+56SOx99LnBZsrWq2eRmLm7Bz16jEYM8zg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] f2fs: add sysfs nodes to get runtime compression stat
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, kernel-team@android.com,
        Daeho Jeong <daehojeong@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

So, do you want we protect the values here with spin_lock and just
read without spin_lock in sysfs read part?

2021=EB=85=84 3=EC=9B=94 12=EC=9D=BC (=EA=B8=88) =EC=98=A4=ED=9B=84 11:37, =
Daeho Jeong <daeho43@gmail.com>=EB=8B=98=EC=9D=B4 =EC=9E=91=EC=84=B1:
>
> As you can see, if we're doing like the below.
>
> sbi->compr_written_block +=3D blocks;
>
> Let's assume the initial value as 0.
>
> <thread A>                                             <thread B>
> sbi->compr_written_block =3D 0;
>
> sbi->compr_written_block =3D 0;
> +blocks(3);
>                                                                + blocks(2=
);
> sbi->compr_written_block =3D 3;
>
> sbi->compr_written_block =3D 2;
>
> Finally, we end up with 2, not 5.
>
> As more threads are participating it, we might miss more counting.
>
> 2021=EB=85=84 3=EC=9B=94 12=EC=9D=BC (=EA=B8=88) =EC=98=A4=ED=9B=84 11:04=
, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>=EB=8B=98=EC=9D=B4 =EC=9E=91=EC=84=B1=
:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 10:56:13PM +0900, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> > > Thanks for suggesting me sysfs_emit().
> > >
> > > For atomic values, actually, those are needed for writer part, not re=
ader.
> > >
> > > +#define add_compr_block_stat(inode, blocks)                         =
   \
> > > +       do {                                                         =
   \
> > > +               struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi =3D F2FS_I_SB(inode);       =
     \
> > > +               int diff =3D F2FS_I(inode)->i_cluster_size - blocks; =
     \
> > > +               atomic64_add(blocks, &sbi->compr_written_block);     =
   \
> > > +               atomic64_add(diff, &sbi->compr_saved_block);         =
   \
> > > +       } while (0)
> > >
> > > I needed a protection here, because they might be updated in the race=
 condition.
> >
> > Why?  What are you trying to protect from "racing" here?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h