From: Li Zetao <lizetao1@huawei.com>
To: <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, <brauner@kernel.org>, <jack@suse.cz>,
<willy@infradead.org>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: <lizetao1@huawei.com>, <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: [RFC PATCH -next 0/3] fs: Introduce the scope-based resource management for folio_lock/unlock
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 15:10:33 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240826071036.2445717-1-lizetao1@huawei.com> (raw)
Hi, all
Currently, multiple kernel subsystems are switching to folio, and the
page API is gradually being phased out. When using folio, due to the
need to consider competition, folio needs to be locked, but
folio_lock/unlock is used directly. Developers need to be careful about
releasing the lock at the appropriate location. By using compiler
features, the kernel has implemented scope-based resource access.
Applying these features to folio can mitigate the risk of forgetting to
release folio lock, and at the same time, can remove some of the
controversial goto unlock code.
Some interfaces are currently not suitable for using scope-based
resource management mechanisms, such as iomap_page_mkwrite. This
interface only needs to release the lock when an error occurs, and needs
to hold the folio lock when it succeeds. Maybe we can intervene in the
compiler's automatic cleanup behavior in a certain scenario like
implementing no_free_ptr.
This patchset has been tested by fsstress for a long time, and no
problems were found.
Thanks,
Li Zetao.
Li Zetao (3):
mm: Support scope-based resource management for folio_lock/unlock
buffer: Using scope-based resource instead of folio_lock/unlock
splice: Using scope-based resource instead of folio_lock/unlock
fs/buffer.c | 6 ++----
fs/splice.c | 21 +++++----------------
include/linux/pagemap.h | 4 ++++
3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
--
2.34.1
next reply other threads:[~2024-08-26 7:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-26 7:10 Li Zetao [this message]
2024-08-26 7:10 ` [RFC PATCH -next 1/3] mm: Support " Li Zetao
2024-08-26 7:10 ` [RFC PATCH -next 2/3] buffer: Using scope-based resource instead of folio_lock/unlock Li Zetao
2024-08-26 7:10 ` [RFC PATCH -next 3/3] splice: " Li Zetao
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240826071036.2445717-1-lizetao1@huawei.com \
--to=lizetao1@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox