mirrors/scoutfs
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/versity/scoutfs.git synced 2026-02-12 13:31:12 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

More efficiently destroy item rbtrees

Browse Source 
I was auditing rb_erase() use and noticed that we we don't need to fully
tear down the item trees.  We can just blow them away with postorder
traversal and raw frees of the nodes.

Signed-off-by: Zach Brown <zab@versity.com>
This commit is contained in:
Zach Brown
2017-02-01 09:40:23 -08:00
parent 0298cbb562
commit 7045e3a6e8
1 changed files with 10 additions and 9 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

19
kmod/src/item.c
View File

@@ -1295,26 +1295,27 @@ int scoutfs_item_setup(struct super_block *sb)
return 0;
}
/*
* There's no more users of the items and ranges at this point. We can
* destroy them without locking and ignoring augmentation.
*/
void scoutfs_item_destroy(struct super_block *sb)
{
struct scoutfs_sb_info *sbi = SCOUTFS_SB(sb);
struct item_cache *cac = sbi->item_cache;
struct cached_item *item;
struct cached_item *pos_item;
struct cached_range *rng;
struct rb_node *node;
struct cached_range *pos_rng;
if (cac) {
for (node = rb_first(&cac->items); node; ) {
item = container_of(node, struct cached_item, node);
node = rb_next(node);
rb_erase(&item->node, &cac->items);
rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe(item, pos_item,
&cac->items, node) {
free_item(sb, item);
}
for (node = rb_first(&cac->ranges); node; ) {
rng = container_of(node, struct cached_range, node);
node = rb_next(node);
rb_erase(&rng->node, &cac->items);
rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe(rng, pos_rng,
&cac->ranges, node) {
free_range(sb, rng);
}