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: <162218354775.34379.5629941272050849549.stgit@web.messagingengine.com>
 <162218364554.34379.636306635794792903.stgit@web.messagingengine.com> <87czt2q2pl.fsf@disp2133>
In-Reply-To: <87czt2q2pl.fsf@disp2133>
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date:   Thu, 3 Jun 2021 20:06:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJfpegsVxoL8WgQa7hFXAg4RBbA-suaeo5pZ5EE7HDpL0rT03A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [REPOST PATCH v4 2/5] kernfs: use VFS negative dentry caching
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc:     Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>,
        Fox Chen <foxhlchen@gmail.com>,
        Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@gmail.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Rick Lindsley <ricklind@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 3 Jun 2021 at 19:26, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>
> Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> writes:
>
> > If there are many lookups for non-existent paths these negative lookups
> > can lead to a lot of overhead during path walks.
> >
> > The VFS allows dentries to be created as negative and hashed, and caches
> > them so they can be used to reduce the fairly high overhead alloc/free
> > cycle that occurs during these lookups.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
> > ---
> >  fs/kernfs/dir.c |   55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> >  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/kernfs/dir.c b/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> > index 4c69e2af82dac..5151c712f06f5 100644
> > --- a/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> > +++ b/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> > @@ -1037,12 +1037,33 @@ static int kernfs_dop_revalidate(struct dentry *dentry, unsigned int flags)
> >       if (flags & LOOKUP_RCU)
> >               return -ECHILD;
> >
> > -     /* Always perform fresh lookup for negatives */
> > -     if (d_really_is_negative(dentry))
> > -             goto out_bad_unlocked;
> > +     mutex_lock(&kernfs_mutex);
> >
> >       kn = kernfs_dentry_node(dentry);
> > -     mutex_lock(&kernfs_mutex);
>
> Why bring kernfs_dentry_node inside the mutex?
>
> The inode lock of the parent should protect negative to positive
> transitions not the kernfs_mutex.  So moving the code inside
> the mutex looks unnecessary and confusing.

Except that d_revalidate() may or may not be called with parent lock held.

Thanks,
Miklos