From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: prepare extent_io.c for future larger folio support
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 11:41:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250225184136.GA1679809@ax162> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19dfc0e42dce6416b66df114513d18d93b830d17.1740043233.git.wqu@suse.com>
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 07:52:25PM +1030, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> When we're handling folios from filemap, we can no longer assume all
> folios are page sized.
>
> Thus for call sites assuming the folio is page sized, change the
> PAGE_SIZE usage to folio_size() instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/extent_io.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
> index e1efb6419601..88bac9a32919 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
> @@ -425,7 +425,7 @@ static void end_folio_read(struct folio *folio, bool uptodate, u64 start, u32 le
> struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = folio_to_fs_info(folio);
>
> ASSERT(folio_pos(folio) <= start &&
> - start + len <= folio_pos(folio) + PAGE_SIZE);
> + start + len <= folio_pos(folio) + folio_size(folio));
>
> if (uptodate && btrfs_verify_folio(folio, start, len))
> btrfs_folio_set_uptodate(fs_info, folio, start, len);
> @@ -492,7 +492,7 @@ static void begin_folio_read(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, struct folio *folio)
> return;
>
> ASSERT(folio_test_private(folio));
> - btrfs_folio_set_lock(fs_info, folio, folio_pos(folio), PAGE_SIZE);
> + btrfs_folio_set_lock(fs_info, folio, folio_pos(folio), folio_size(folio));
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -753,7 +753,7 @@ static void submit_extent_folio(struct btrfs_bio_ctrl *bio_ctrl,
> {
> struct btrfs_inode *inode = folio_to_inode(folio);
>
> - ASSERT(pg_offset + size <= PAGE_SIZE);
> + ASSERT(pg_offset + size <= folio_size(folio));
> ASSERT(bio_ctrl->end_io_func);
>
> if (bio_ctrl->bbio &&
> @@ -935,7 +935,7 @@ static int btrfs_do_readpage(struct folio *folio, struct extent_map **em_cached,
> struct inode *inode = folio->mapping->host;
> struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = inode_to_fs_info(inode);
> u64 start = folio_pos(folio);
> - const u64 end = start + PAGE_SIZE - 1;
> + const u64 end = start + folio_size(folio) - 1;
> u64 cur = start;
> u64 extent_offset;
> u64 last_byte = i_size_read(inode);
> @@ -1277,7 +1277,7 @@ static void set_delalloc_bitmap(struct folio *folio, unsigned long *delalloc_bit
> unsigned int start_bit;
> unsigned int nbits;
>
> - ASSERT(start >= folio_start && start + len <= folio_start + PAGE_SIZE);
> + ASSERT(start >= folio_start && start + len <= folio_start + folio_size(folio));
> start_bit = (start - folio_start) >> fs_info->sectorsize_bits;
> nbits = len >> fs_info->sectorsize_bits;
> ASSERT(bitmap_test_range_all_zero(delalloc_bitmap, start_bit, nbits));
> @@ -1295,7 +1295,7 @@ static bool find_next_delalloc_bitmap(struct folio *folio,
> unsigned int first_zero;
> unsigned int first_set;
>
> - ASSERT(start >= folio_start && start < folio_start + PAGE_SIZE);
> + ASSERT(start >= folio_start && start < folio_start + folio_size(folio));
>
> start_bit = (start - folio_start) >> fs_info->sectorsize_bits;
> first_set = find_next_bit(delalloc_bitmap, bitmap_size, start_bit);
> @@ -1497,10 +1497,10 @@ static noinline_for_stack int writepage_delalloc(struct btrfs_inode *inode,
> delalloc_end = page_end;
> /*
> * delalloc_end is already one less than the total length, so
> - * we don't subtract one from PAGE_SIZE
> + * we don't subtract one from folio_size().
> */
> delalloc_to_write +=
> - DIV_ROUND_UP(delalloc_end + 1 - page_start, PAGE_SIZE);
> + DIV_ROUND_UP(delalloc_end + 1 - page_start, folio_size(folio));
>
> /*
> * If all ranges are submitted asynchronously, we just need to account
> @@ -1737,7 +1737,7 @@ static int extent_writepage(struct folio *folio, struct btrfs_bio_ctrl *bio_ctrl
> goto done;
>
> ret = extent_writepage_io(inode, folio, folio_pos(folio),
> - PAGE_SIZE, bio_ctrl, i_size);
> + folio_size(folio), bio_ctrl, i_size);
> if (ret == 1)
> return 0;
> if (ret < 0)
> @@ -2468,8 +2468,8 @@ void extent_write_locked_range(struct inode *inode, const struct folio *locked_f
> ASSERT(IS_ALIGNED(start, sectorsize) && IS_ALIGNED(end + 1, sectorsize));
>
> while (cur <= end) {
> - u64 cur_end = min(round_down(cur, PAGE_SIZE) + PAGE_SIZE - 1, end);
> - u32 cur_len = cur_end + 1 - cur;
> + u64 cur_end;
> + u32 cur_len;
> struct folio *folio;
>
> folio = filemap_get_folio(mapping, cur >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> @@ -2479,13 +2479,18 @@ void extent_write_locked_range(struct inode *inode, const struct folio *locked_f
> * code is just in case, but shouldn't actually be run.
> */
> if (IS_ERR(folio)) {
> + cur_end = min(round_down(cur, PAGE_SIZE) + PAGE_SIZE - 1, end);
> + cur_len = cur_end + 1 - cur;
> btrfs_mark_ordered_io_finished(BTRFS_I(inode), NULL,
> cur, cur_len, false);
> mapping_set_error(mapping, PTR_ERR(folio));
> - cur = cur_end + 1;
> + cur = cur_end;
> continue;
> }
>
> + cur_end = min(folio_pos(folio) + folio_size(folio) - 1, end);
As the kernel test robot points out, this breaks the build for 32-bit
targets in -next because folio_pos() returns loff_t and folio_size()
returns size_t, which is 'unsigned int' for 32-bit instead of 'unsigned
long', so the whole expression gets promoted to 'long long' from the
loff_t, mismatching the sign of end. I just silenced it with a cast to
u64 before folio_pos() but that is likely incorrect as a formal fix,
hence just the extra comment.
> + cur_len = cur_end + 1 - cur;
> +
> ASSERT(folio_test_locked(folio));
> if (pages_dirty && folio != locked_folio)
> ASSERT(folio_test_dirty(folio));
> @@ -2597,7 +2602,7 @@ static bool try_release_extent_state(struct extent_io_tree *tree,
> struct folio *folio)
> {
> u64 start = folio_pos(folio);
> - u64 end = start + PAGE_SIZE - 1;
> + u64 end = start + folio_size(folio) - 1;
> bool ret;
>
> if (test_range_bit_exists(tree, start, end, EXTENT_LOCKED)) {
> @@ -2635,7 +2640,7 @@ static bool try_release_extent_state(struct extent_io_tree *tree,
> bool try_release_extent_mapping(struct folio *folio, gfp_t mask)
> {
> u64 start = folio_pos(folio);
> - u64 end = start + PAGE_SIZE - 1;
> + u64 end = start + folio_size(folio) - 1;
> struct btrfs_inode *inode = folio_to_inode(folio);
> struct extent_io_tree *io_tree = &inode->io_tree;
>
> --
> 2.48.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-25 18:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-20 9:22 [PATCH 0/5] btrfs: prepare for larger folios support Qu Wenruo
2025-02-20 9:22 ` [PATCH 1/5] btrfs: prepare subpage.c " Qu Wenruo
2025-02-21 12:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2025-02-22 5:03 ` Qu Wenruo
2025-02-20 9:22 ` [PATCH 2/5] btrfs: remove the PAGE_SIZE usage inside inline extent reads Qu Wenruo
2025-02-21 11:37 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2025-02-20 9:22 ` [PATCH 3/5] btrfs: prepare btrfs_launcher_folio() for larger folios support Qu Wenruo
2025-02-21 12:08 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2025-02-20 9:22 ` [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: prepare extent_io.c for future larger folio support Qu Wenruo
2025-02-21 12:12 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2025-02-22 5:02 ` Qu Wenruo
2025-02-25 18:41 ` Nathan Chancellor [this message]
2025-02-20 9:22 ` [PATCH 5/5] btrfs: prepare btrfs_page_mkwrite() for larger folios Qu Wenruo
2025-02-21 12:22 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2025-02-21 11:23 ` [PATCH 0/5] btrfs: prepare for larger folios support Johannes Thumshirn
2025-02-21 12:34 ` Filipe Manana
2025-02-21 22:33 ` 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=20250225184136.GA1679809@ax162 \
--to=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wqu@suse.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox