From: Matthias Prager <linux@matthiasprager.de>
To: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: Matthias Prager <linux@matthiasprager.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Btrfs: make raid attr array more readable
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:47:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50F6935A.70204@matthiasprager.de> (raw)
One small error (see below):
> As the title said, this patch just make raid attr array more readable.
>
> Cc: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 10 +++++++++-
> fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 22 +++++++++-------------
> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 3 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> index 9ee099f..541ce9a 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> @@ -953,7 +953,15 @@ struct btrfs_dev_replace_item {
> #define BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP (1ULL << 5)
> #define BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10 (1ULL << 6)
> #define BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RESERVED BTRFS_AVAIL_ALLOC_BIT_SINGLE
> -#define BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES 5
> +
> +enum btrfs_raid_types {
> + BTRFS_RAID_RAID10,
> + BTRFS_RAID_RAID1,
> + BTRFS_RAID_DUP,
> + BTRFS_RAID_RAID0,
> + BTRFS_RAID_SINGLE,
> + BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES
> +};
>
> #define BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_TYPE_MASK (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA | \
> BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_SYSTEM | \
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> index e68585d..6de0621 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> @@ -5547,20 +5547,16 @@ wait_block_group_cache_done(struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache)
>
> int __get_raid_index(u64 flags)
> {
> - int index;
> -
> if (flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10)
> - index = 0;
> + return BTRFS_RAID_RAID10;
> else if (flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1)
> - index = 1;
> + return BTRFS_RAID_RAID1;
> else if (flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP)
> - index = 2;
> + return BTRFS_RAID_DUP;
> else if (flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0)
> - index = 3;
> + return BTRFS_RAID_RAID0;
> else
> - index = 4;
> -
> - return index;
> + return BTRFS_RAID_SINGLE;
> }
>
> static int get_block_group_index(struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache)
> @@ -7520,16 +7516,16 @@ int btrfs_can_relocate(struct btrfs_root *root, u64 bytenr)
> index = get_block_group_index(block_group);
> }
>
> - if (index == 0) {
> + if (index == BTRFS_RAID_RAID10) {
> dev_min = 4;
> /* Divide by 2 */
> min_free >>= 1;
> - } else if (index == 1) {
> + } else if (index == BTRFS_RAID_RAID1) {
> dev_min = 2;
> - } else if (index == 2) {
> + } else if (index == BTRFS_RAID_DUP) {
> /* Multiply by 2 */
> min_free <<= 1;
> - } else if (index == 3) {
> + } else if (index == BTRFS_RAID_RAID0) {
> dev_min = fs_devices->rw_devices;
> do_div(min_free, dev_min);
> }
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> index 7fa9773..edc5ee3 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> @@ -3492,13 +3492,48 @@ static int btrfs_cmp_device_info(const void *a, const void *b)
> }
>
> struct btrfs_raid_attr btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES] = {
> - { 2, 1, 0, 4, 2, 2 /* raid10 */ },
> - { 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2 /* raid1 */ },
> - { 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 2 /* dup */ },
> - { 1, 1, 0, 2, 1, 1 /* raid0 */ },
> - { 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 /* single */ },
> + [BTRFS_RAID_RAID10] = {
> + .sub_stripes = 2,
> + .dev_stripes = 1,
> + .devs_max = 0, /* 0 == as many as possible */
> + .devs_min = 4,
> + .devs_increment = 2,
> + .ncopies = 2,
> + },
> + [BTRFS_RAID_RAID1] = {
> + .sub_stripes = 1,
> + .dev_stripes = 1,
> + .devs_max = 2,
> + .devs_min = 2,
> + .devs_increment = 2,
> + .ncopies = 2,
> + },
> + [BTRFS_RAID_DUP] = {
> + .sub_stripes = 1,
> + .dev_stripes = 2,
> + .devs_max = 1,
> + .devs_min = 1,
> + .devs_increment = 1,
> + .ncopies = 2,
> + },
> + [BTRFS_RAID_RAID0] = {
> + .sub_stripes = 1,
> + .dev_stripes = 1,
> + .devs_max = 0,
> + .devs_min = 2,
> + .devs_increment = 1,
> + .ncopies = 1,
> + },
> + [BTRFS_RAID_RAID0] = {
Shouldn't this rather be BTRFS_RAID_SINGLE ?
> + .sub_stripes = 1,
> + .dev_stripes = 1,
> + .devs_max = 1,
> + .devs_min = 1,
> + .devs_increment = 1,
> + .ncopies = 1,
> + },
> };
> -
> +
> static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> struct btrfs_root *extent_root,
> struct map_lookup **map_ret,
> --
> 1.7.11.7
> --
> 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
next reply other threads:[~2013-01-16 11:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-16 11:47 Matthias Prager [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-01-16 11:33 [PATCH 2/2] Btrfs: make raid attr array more readable Miao Xie
2013-01-16 14:04 ` David Sterba
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=50F6935A.70204@matthiasprager.de \
--to=linux@matthiasprager.de \
--cc=bo.li.liu@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).