From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 04/10] btrfs: relocation: Rename mark_block_processed() and __mark_block_processed()
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 17:45:47 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200302094553.58827-5-wqu@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200302094553.58827-1-wqu@suse.com>
These two functions are weirdly named, mark_block_processed() in fact
just mark a range dirty unconditionally, while __mark_block_processed()
does extra check before doing the marking.
This patch will open code old mark_block_processed, and rename
__mark_block_processed() to remove the "__" prefix.
Since we're here, also kill the forward declaration, which could also
kill in_block_group() with in_range() macro.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
---
fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++--------------------------
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/relocation.c b/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
index 490d684002f9..d1e1d613ab98 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
@@ -236,8 +236,21 @@ struct reloc_control {
static void remove_backref_node(struct backref_cache *cache,
struct backref_node *node);
-static void __mark_block_processed(struct reloc_control *rc,
- struct backref_node *node);
+
+static void mark_block_processed(struct reloc_control *rc,
+ struct backref_node *node)
+{
+ u32 blocksize;
+ if (node->level == 0 ||
+ in_range(node->bytenr, rc->block_group->start,
+ rc->block_group->length)) {
+ blocksize = rc->extent_root->fs_info->nodesize;
+ set_extent_bits(&rc->processed_blocks, node->bytenr,
+ node->bytenr + blocksize - 1, EXTENT_DIRTY);
+ }
+ node->processed = 1;
+}
+
static void mapping_tree_init(struct mapping_tree *tree)
{
@@ -1103,7 +1116,7 @@ struct backref_node *build_backref_tree(struct reloc_control *rc,
if (list_empty(&lower->upper))
list_add(&lower->list, &useless);
}
- __mark_block_processed(rc, upper);
+ mark_block_processed(rc, upper);
if (upper->level > 0) {
list_add(&upper->list, &cache->detached);
upper->detached = 1;
@@ -1569,14 +1582,6 @@ static struct inode *find_next_inode(struct btrfs_root *root, u64 objectid)
return NULL;
}
-static int in_block_group(u64 bytenr, struct btrfs_block_group *block_group)
-{
- if (bytenr >= block_group->start &&
- bytenr < block_group->start + block_group->length)
- return 1;
- return 0;
-}
-
/*
* get new location of data
*/
@@ -1674,7 +1679,8 @@ int replace_file_extents(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
num_bytes = btrfs_file_extent_disk_num_bytes(leaf, fi);
if (bytenr == 0)
continue;
- if (!in_block_group(bytenr, rc->block_group))
+ if (!in_range(bytenr, rc->block_group->start,
+ rc->block_group->length))
continue;
/*
@@ -2604,7 +2610,7 @@ struct btrfs_root *select_reloc_root(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
ASSERT(next->root);
list_add_tail(&next->list,
&rc->backref_cache.changed);
- __mark_block_processed(rc, next);
+ mark_block_processed(rc, next);
break;
}
@@ -2954,25 +2960,6 @@ static int finish_pending_nodes(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
return err;
}
-static void mark_block_processed(struct reloc_control *rc,
- u64 bytenr, u32 blocksize)
-{
- set_extent_bits(&rc->processed_blocks, bytenr, bytenr + blocksize - 1,
- EXTENT_DIRTY);
-}
-
-static void __mark_block_processed(struct reloc_control *rc,
- struct backref_node *node)
-{
- u32 blocksize;
- if (node->level == 0 ||
- in_block_group(node->bytenr, rc->block_group)) {
- blocksize = rc->extent_root->fs_info->nodesize;
- mark_block_processed(rc, node->bytenr, blocksize);
- }
- node->processed = 1;
-}
-
/*
* mark a block and all blocks directly/indirectly reference the block
* as processed.
@@ -2991,7 +2978,7 @@ static void update_processed_blocks(struct reloc_control *rc,
if (next->processed)
break;
- __mark_block_processed(rc, next);
+ mark_block_processed(rc, next);
if (list_empty(&next->upper))
break;
@@ -4743,7 +4730,7 @@ int btrfs_reloc_cow_block(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
}
if (first_cow)
- __mark_block_processed(rc, node);
+ mark_block_processed(rc, node);
if (first_cow && level > 0)
rc->nodes_relocated += buf->len;
--
2.25.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-02 9:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-02 9:45 [PATCH v2 00/10] btrfs: relocation: Refactor build_backref_tree() Qu Wenruo
2020-03-02 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 01/10] btrfs: backref: Introduce the skeleton of btrfs_backref_iter Qu Wenruo
2020-03-03 17:19 ` David Sterba
2020-03-04 0:50 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-03-03 17:25 ` David Sterba
2020-03-04 0:52 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-03-04 7:41 ` Nikolay Borisov
2020-03-02 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 02/10] btrfs: backref: Implement btrfs_backref_iter_next() Qu Wenruo
2020-03-02 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 03/10] btrfs: relocation: Use btrfs_backref_iter infrastructure Qu Wenruo
2020-03-02 9:45 ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2020-03-02 17:21 ` [PATCH v2 04/10] btrfs: relocation: Rename mark_block_processed() and __mark_block_processed() Nikolay Borisov
2020-03-02 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 05/10] btrfs: relocation: Refactor tree backref processing into its own function Qu Wenruo
2020-03-03 17:29 ` David Sterba
2020-03-04 1:00 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-03-04 12:23 ` Nikolay Borisov
2020-03-04 12:33 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-03-02 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 06/10] btrfs: relocation: Use wrapper to replace open-coded edge linking Qu Wenruo
2020-03-03 17:30 ` David Sterba
2020-03-04 1:02 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-03-04 13:02 ` Nikolay Borisov
2020-03-02 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 07/10] btrfs: relocation: Specify essential members for alloc_backref_node() Qu Wenruo
2020-03-04 13:06 ` Nikolay Borisov
2020-03-04 13:09 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-03-02 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 08/10] btrfs: relocation: Remove the open-coded goto loop for breadth-first search Qu Wenruo
2020-03-04 14:24 ` Nikolay Borisov
2020-03-05 0:40 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-03-05 8:17 ` Nikolay Borisov
2020-03-05 8:37 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-03-02 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 09/10] btrfs: relocation: Refactor the finishing part of upper linkage into finish_upper_links() Qu Wenruo
2020-03-02 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 10/10] btrfs: relocation: Refactor the useless nodes handling into its own function Qu Wenruo
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=20200302094553.58827-5-wqu@suse.com \
--to=wqu@suse.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox