From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
Cc: chandan.babu@oracle.com, dchinner@redhat.com, hch@lst.de,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, catherine.hoang@oracle.com,
martin.petersen@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 12/14] xfs: Unmap blocks according to forcealign
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2024 09:19:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240807161944.GJ6051@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5e4e6fdb-03fe-4541-8f09-8300665551a2@oracle.com>
On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 02:40:36PM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> On 06/08/2024 21:14, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 04:30:55PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> > > For when forcealign is enabled, blocks in an inode need to be unmapped
> > > according to extent alignment, like what is already done for rtvol.
> > >
> > > Change variable isrt in __xfs_bunmapi() to a bool, as that is really what
> > > it is.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
> > > ---
> > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 16 ++++++++++++++
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h | 2 ++
> > > 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> > > index 0c3df8c71c6d..d6ae344a17fc 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> > > @@ -5409,6 +5409,25 @@ xfs_bmap_del_extent_real(
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > > +static xfs_extlen_t
> > > +xfs_bunmapi_align(
> > > + struct xfs_inode *ip,
> > > + xfs_fsblock_t fsbno,
> > > + xfs_extlen_t *off)
> > > +{
> > > + struct xfs_mount *mp = ip->i_mount;
> > > +
> > > + if (XFS_IS_REALTIME_INODE(ip))
> > > + return xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize_align(ip, fsbno, off);
> > > + /*
> > > + * The agbno for the fsbno is aligned to extsize, but the fsbno itself
> > > + * is not necessarily aligned (to extsize), so use agbno to determine
> > > + * mod+offset to the alloc unit boundary.
> > > + */
> > > + return xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize_align(ip, XFS_FSB_TO_AGBNO(mp, fsbno),
> > > + off);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Unmap (remove) blocks from a file.
> > > * If nexts is nonzero then the number of extents to remove is limited to
> > > @@ -5430,7 +5449,8 @@ __xfs_bunmapi(
> > > xfs_extnum_t extno; /* extent number in list */
> > > struct xfs_bmbt_irec got; /* current extent record */
> > > struct xfs_ifork *ifp; /* inode fork pointer */
> > > - int isrt; /* freeing in rt area */
> > > + bool isrt; /* freeing in rt area */
> > > + bool isforcealign; /* forcealign inode */
> > > int logflags; /* transaction logging flags */
> > > xfs_extlen_t mod; /* rt extent offset */
> > > struct xfs_mount *mp = ip->i_mount;
> > > @@ -5468,6 +5488,8 @@ __xfs_bunmapi(
> > > }
> > > XFS_STATS_INC(mp, xs_blk_unmap);
> > > isrt = xfs_ifork_is_realtime(ip, whichfork);
> > > + isforcealign = (whichfork != XFS_ATTR_FORK) &&
> > > + xfs_inode_has_forcealign(ip);
> > > end = start + len;
> > > if (!xfs_iext_lookup_extent_before(ip, ifp, &end, &icur, &got)) {
> > > @@ -5486,6 +5508,8 @@ __xfs_bunmapi(
> > > extno = 0;
> > > while (end != (xfs_fileoff_t)-1 && end >= start &&
> > > (nexts == 0 || extno < nexts)) {
> > > + xfs_extlen_t off;
> >
> > I got really confused because I thought this was a file block offset and
> > only after more digging realized that this is a sometimes dummy
> > adjustment variable.
>
> yeah, I put it here to use the common helper in both callsites
>
> >
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Is the found extent after a hole in which end lives?
> > > * Just back up to the previous extent, if so.
> > > @@ -5519,18 +5543,18 @@ __xfs_bunmapi(
> > > if (del.br_startoff + del.br_blockcount > end + 1)
> > > del.br_blockcount = end + 1 - del.br_startoff;
> > > - if (!isrt || (flags & XFS_BMAPI_REMAP))
> > > + if ((!isrt && !isforcealign) || (flags & XFS_BMAPI_REMAP))
> > > goto delete;
> > > - mod = xfs_rtb_to_rtxoff(mp,
> > > - del.br_startblock + del.br_blockcount);
> > > + mod = xfs_bunmapi_align(ip,
> > > + del.br_startblock + del.br_blockcount, &off);
> > > if (mod) {
> >
> > Oof. I don't like how this loop body has the rtx adjustment code
> > inlined into it. We only use the isrt flag for the one test above.
> > I tried hoisting this into something less gross involving separate
> > adjustment functions but then you have to pass in so many outer
> > variables that it becomes a mess.
> >
> > The best I can come up with for now is:
> >
> > unsigned int alloc_fsb = xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize(ip);
> > /* no more isrt/isforcealign bools */
> >
> > ...
> >
> > if (alloc_fsb == 1 || (flags & XFS_BMAPI_REMAP))
> > goto delete;
>
> ok, good
>
> >
> > mod = do_div(del.br_startblock + del.br_blockcount,
> > alloc_fsb);
>
> Note that xfs_bunmapi_align() uses agbno for !rt
Right, I forgot about that. Can we make the name say that we're
computing the offset within an allocunit? It's not actually aligning
any of its parameters.
static inline unsigned int
xfs_bmap_alloc_unit_offset(
struct xfs_inode *ip,
xfs_fsblock_t fsbno,
unsigned int alloc_fsb)
{
xfs_agblock_t agbno;
if (XFS_IS_REALTIME_INODE(ip))
return do_div(fsbno, alloc_fsb);
agbno = XFS_FSB_TO_AGBNO(ip->i_mount, fsbno);
return agbno % alloc_fsb;
}
mod = xfs_bmap_alloc_unit_offset(ip,
del.br_startblock + del.br_blockcount,
alloc_fsb);
and
mod = xfs_bmap_alloc_unit_offset(ip, del.br_startblock,
alloc_fsb);
--D
>
> > if (mod) {
> >
> > > /*
> > > - * Realtime extent not lined up at the end.
> > > + * Not aligned to allocation unit on the end.
> > > * The extent could have been split into written
> > > * and unwritten pieces, or we could just be
> > > * unmapping part of it. But we can't really
> > > - * get rid of part of a realtime extent.
> > > + * get rid of part of an extent.
> > > */
> > > if (del.br_state == XFS_EXT_UNWRITTEN) {
> > > /*
> > > @@ -5554,7 +5578,7 @@ __xfs_bunmapi(
> > > ASSERT(del.br_state == XFS_EXT_NORM);
> > > ASSERT(tp->t_blk_res > 0);
> > > /*
> > > - * If this spans a realtime extent boundary,
> > > + * If this spans an extent boundary,
> > > * chop it back to the start of the one we end at.
> > > */
> > > if (del.br_blockcount > mod) {
> > > @@ -5571,14 +5595,12 @@ __xfs_bunmapi(
> > > goto nodelete;
> > > }
> > > - mod = xfs_rtb_to_rtxoff(mp, del.br_startblock);
> > > + mod = xfs_bunmapi_align(ip, del.br_startblock, &off);
> > > if (mod) {
> > > - xfs_extlen_t off = mp->m_sb.sb_rextsize - mod;
> >
> > mod = do_div(del.br_startblock, alloc_fsb);
> > if (mod) {
> > xfs_extlen_t off = alloc_fsb - mod;
> >
> > At least then you don't need this weird xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize_align
> > that passes back two xfs_extlen_t arguments.
>
> Sure, but same point about xfs_bunmapi_align() using agbno. I suppose I can
> just make the change to not have xfs_bunmapi_align() be passed the off
> address pointer, and do the calcation here for off here (as you suggest).
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-07 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-01 16:30 [PATCH v3 00/14] forcealign for xfs John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 01/14] xfs: only allow minlen allocations when near ENOSPC John Garry
2024-08-06 18:51 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:26 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 02/14] xfs: always tail align maxlen allocations John Garry
2024-08-13 15:01 ` John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 03/14] xfs: simplify extent allocation alignment John Garry
2024-08-06 18:56 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-06 23:52 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-07 0:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:34 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 04/14] xfs: make EOF allocation simpler John Garry
2024-08-06 18:58 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:00 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-07 0:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 05/14] xfs: introduce forced allocation alignment John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 06/14] xfs: align args->minlen for " John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 07/14] xfs: Introduce FORCEALIGN inode flag John Garry
2024-08-06 19:02 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 11:42 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 14:40 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 08/14] xfs: Update xfs_inode_alloc_unitsize() for forcealign John Garry
2024-08-06 19:02 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 09/14] xfs: Update xfs_setattr_size() " John Garry
2024-08-06 19:03 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 10/14] xfs: Do not free EOF blocks " John Garry
2024-08-06 19:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 12:33 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 15:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 11/14] xfs: Only free full extents " John Garry
2024-08-06 19:27 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:08 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-07 13:06 ` John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 12/14] xfs: Unmap blocks according to forcealign John Garry
2024-08-06 20:14 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 13:40 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 16:19 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 13/14] xfs: Don't revert allocated offset for forcealign John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 14/14] xfs: Enable file data forcealign feature John Garry
2024-08-06 19:43 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 13:50 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 15:17 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=20240807161944.GJ6051@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=catherine.hoang@oracle.com \
--cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.