From: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
To: Jan Schmidt <list.btrfs@jan-o-sch.net>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: cleanup for __merge_refs
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:01:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <507FB74B.4020807@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <507FB2E1.2090106@jan-o-sch.net>
On 10/18/2012 03:42 PM, Jan Schmidt wrote:
> On Thu, October 18, 2012 at 09:36 (+0200), Liu Bo wrote:
>> On 10/18/2012 03:31 PM, Jan Schmidt wrote:
>>> On Thu, October 18, 2012 at 09:10 (+0200), Liu Bo wrote:
>>>> Parents must be same after going through ref_for_same_block.
>>>
>>> Well. We could kill that for the moment. However, ref_for_same_block wasn't
>>> meant to check for the parent. We should do ...
>>>
>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/backref.c
>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/backref.c
>>> @@ -400,8 +400,6 @@ static inline int ref_for_same_block(struct __prelim_ref *ref1,
>>> return 0;
>>> if (ref1->key_for_search.offset != ref2->key_for_search.offset)
>>> return 0;
>>> - if (ref1->parent != ref2->parent)
>>> - return 0;
>>>
>>> return 1;
>>> }
>>>
>>> Those two lines were originally added while debugging. The idea was to merge
>>> indirect (parent == 0) and shared backrefs (parent != 0) to avoid the expensive
>>> tree search for indirect backrefs when possible.
>>>
>>> We would need extensive testing to remove those two lines from the current
>>> version, though...
>>>
>>
>> Oh, all right, would you make this as a patch by yourself or I can send a V2 for you?
>
> If you want to make sure nothing would break with that patch, feel free to send
> it :-) It's quite a few things to think of, and a lot to test, though. Currently
> I don't want to put that much effort into backref walking performance. I might
> do so later if you decide not to do it now.
>
Well, I can make the change locally and do some testing to see if it brings any bugs.
> I'm also okay with applying your original patch for now, although those lines
> are very likely come back in the future.
>
So just leave it alone :)
thanks,
liubo
> Thanks,
> -Jan
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-18 8:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-18 7:10 [PATCH] Btrfs: cleanup for __merge_refs Liu Bo
2012-10-18 7:31 ` Jan Schmidt
2012-10-18 7:36 ` Liu Bo
2012-10-18 7:42 ` Jan Schmidt
2012-10-18 8:01 ` Liu Bo [this message]
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=507FB74B.4020807@oracle.com \
--to=bo.li.liu@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=list.btrfs@jan-o-sch.net \
/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.