From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] xfs: reduce the number of pagb_lock roundtrips in xfs_alloc_clear_busy
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 11:13:40 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110429011340.GX12436@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1303923381.2056.58.camel@doink>
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:56:21AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 15:06 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Instead of finding the per-ag and then taking and releasing the pagb_lock
> > for every single busy extent completed sort the list of busy extents and
> > only switch betweens AGs where nessecary. This becomes especially important
> > with the online discard support which will hit this lock more often.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>
> I said this looked good before, but since you haven't
> indicated that here yet, I'll make one more comment.
>
> Both places that call (the new) xfs_alloc_busy_clear()
> precede the call with a call to xfs_alloc_busy_sort().
> Considering that, and the fact that xfs_alloc_busy_clear()
> depends on the list being sorted for correct (or at least
> efficient) operation, I think you should just embed the
> list_sort() call in xfs_alloc_busy_clear().
>
> There would then be no real need to define the
> xfs_alloc_busy_sort() helper (just call list_sort()
> directly), and you can move the definition of
> xfs_busy_extent_ag_cmp() up in the file and give
> it private scope.
I agree with this - sorting the list externally just seems to
complicate the API and means callers need to remember to sort the
list first...
Otherwise,
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-29 1:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-24 19:06 [PATCH 0/4] improved busy extent handling V5 Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-24 19:06 ` [PATCH 1/4] xfs: optimize AGFL refills Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-29 0:41 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-24 19:06 ` [PATCH 2/4] xfs: do not immediately reuse busy extent ranges Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-29 0:58 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-24 19:06 ` [PATCH 3/4] xfs: exact busy extent tracking Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-29 1:10 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-24 19:06 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs: reduce the number of pagb_lock roundtrips in xfs_alloc_clear_busy Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-27 16:56 ` Alex Elder
2011-04-27 19:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-29 1:13 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-04-18 6:59 [PATCH 0/4] improved busy extent handling V4 Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-18 6:59 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs: reduce the number of pagb_lock roundtrips in xfs_alloc_clear_busy Christoph Hellwig
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=20110429011340.GX12436@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=aelder@sgi.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.