I have a patch that I would like people to test and review. It's available here: http://www.chesapeake.net/~jroberson/smpffs.diff The short description: This patch removes Giant from the read(), write(), and fstat() syscalls, as well as page faults, and bufdone (io interrupts) when using FFS. It adds a considerable amount of locking to FFS and softupdates. You may also use non ffs filesystems concurrently, but they will be protected by Giant. If you are using quotas you should not yet run this patch. I have done some buildworlds, but any heavy filesystem activity would be appreciated. Long description: There is now a per mount-point mutex in struct ufsmount that covers ffs's struct fs related allocation routines. The rest of the filesystem was already covered by the buffer locks on cgs, indirs, etc, as well as a few mutexes that were already in place. I made great attempts to minimize the number of lock operations for the common cases which resulted in a couple of functions which may be entered with the UFS lock held, but return without it held. Where this is not already done, it will be documented in comments. The softupdate lk lock has been turned into a mutex, and it now protects all global worklists, inode and page dep hash buckets, etc. interlocked_sleep() is gone now that BUF_LOCK() and msleep() take interlock arguments. getdirtybuf() has been slightly changed to solve some sleep related races that I disucssed with Kirk. For now there is a single softupdates mutex, but eventually it will be made per-mountpoint and potentially merged with the ufsmount lock. On the infrastructure side, the buffer cache was locked some time ago, and now the vm is safe to run without Giant, so there are simply a lot of removed GIANT_REQUIRED lines. I added some locking to vn_start_write() and friends, and made some changes for LORs there. There is a pair of new macros called VFS_(UN)LOCK_GIANT(mp) which inspects a new flag on the mount-point to determine if we have to acquire giant. This is done very early in the syscall path before we call any VOPs. The mountpoints should be safe to inspect as we always own a reference to the vnode in the cases that I have unwound for now. Cheers, JeffReceived on Sat Nov 20 2004 - 04:24:12 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:22 UTC