From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Jan kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7 v2] ext4: reclaim extents from extent status tree
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 15:24:43 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130121072443.GA24053@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130118053947.GD13785@thunk.org>
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:39:47AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:19:21AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > I'm a bit concerned we might be too aggressive,
> > because there are two ways that items can be freed from the
> > extent_status tree. One is if the inode is not used at all, and when
> > we release the inode, we'll drop all of the entries in the
> > extent_status_tree for that inode. The second way is via the shrinker
> > which we've registered.
>
> If we use the sb->s_op->free_cached_objects() approach, something like
> the following change to prune_super() in fs/super.c might address the
> above concern:
Sorry for delay reply. I believe that sb->s_op->free_cached_objbects()
approach is better. So in next version I will try to implement this approach.
>
> diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
> index 12f1237..fb57bd2 100644
> --- a/fs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/super.c
> @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ static int prune_super(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> if (sc->nr_to_scan) {
> int dentries;
> int inodes;
> + int fs_to_scan = 0;
>
> /* proportion the scan between the caches */
> dentries = (sc->nr_to_scan * sb->s_nr_dentry_unused) /
> @@ -87,7 +88,7 @@ static int prune_super(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> inodes = (sc->nr_to_scan * sb->s_nr_inodes_unused) /
> total_objects;
> if (fs_objects)
> - fs_objects = (sc->nr_to_scan * fs_objects) /
> + fs_to_scan = (sc->nr_to_scan * fs_objects) /
> total_objects;
> /*
> * prune the dcache first as the icache is pinned by it, then
> @@ -96,8 +97,23 @@ static int prune_super(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> prune_dcache_sb(sb, dentries);
> prune_icache_sb(sb, inodes);
>
> - if (fs_objects && sb->s_op->free_cached_objects) {
> - sb->s_op->free_cached_objects(sb, fs_objects);
> + /*
> + * If as a result of pruning the icache, we released some
> + * of the fs_objects, give credit to the fact and
> + * reduce the number of fs objects that we should try
> + * to release.
> + */
> + if (fs_to_scan) {
> + int fs_objects_now = sb->s_op->nr_cached_objects(sb);
> +
> + if (fs_objects_now < fs_objects)
> + fs_to_scan -= fs_objects - fs_objects_now;
> + if (fs_to_scan < 0)
> + fs_to_scan = 0;
> + }
> +
> + if (fs_to_scan && sb->s_op->free_cached_objects) {
> + sb->s_op->free_cached_objects(sb, fs_to_scan);
> fs_objects = sb->s_op->nr_cached_objects(sb);
> }
> total_objects = sb->s_nr_dentry_unused +
>
> What do folks think?
Do we need to CC' linux-fsdevel mailling list to let other folks review
this patch?
Thanks,
- Zheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-21 7:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-11 10:53 [PATCH 0/7 v2] ext4: extent status tree (step2) Zheng Liu
2013-01-11 10:53 ` [PATCH 1/7 v2] ext4: refine extent status tree Zheng Liu
2013-01-23 4:20 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-01-11 10:53 ` [PATCH 2/7 v2] ext4: remove EXT4_MAP_FROM_CLUSTER flag Zheng Liu
2013-01-11 10:53 ` [PATCH 3/7 v2] ext4: add physical block and status member into extent status tree Zheng Liu
2013-01-17 4:42 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-01-18 9:49 ` Zheng Liu
2013-01-11 10:53 ` [PATCH 4/7 v2] ext4: adjust interfaces of " Zheng Liu
2013-01-11 10:53 ` [PATCH 5/7 v2] ext4: track all extent status in " Zheng Liu
2013-01-23 4:31 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-01-11 10:53 ` [PATCH 6/7 v2] ext4: lookup block mapping " Zheng Liu
2013-01-18 4:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-01-18 9:52 ` Zheng Liu
2013-01-11 10:53 ` [PATCH 7/7 v2] ext4: reclaim extents from " Zheng Liu
2013-01-18 5:19 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-01-18 5:39 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-01-21 7:24 ` Zheng Liu [this message]
2013-01-21 15:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-01-21 17:09 ` Zheng Liu
2013-01-23 6:06 ` [PATCH] fs: allow for fs-specific objects to be pruned as part of pruning inodes Theodore Ts'o
2013-01-23 10:52 ` Jan Kara
2013-01-23 13:06 ` Carlos Maiolino
2013-01-23 13:32 ` Dave Chinner
2013-01-23 16:34 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-01-23 23:35 ` Dave Chinner
2013-01-24 8:58 ` Andrew Morton
2013-01-24 20:03 ` Dave Chinner
2013-01-21 14:43 ` [PATCH 7/7 v2] ext4: reclaim extents from extent status tree Jan Kara
2013-01-21 15:12 ` Zheng Liu
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=20130121072443.GA24053@gmail.com \
--to=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=wenqing.lz@taobao.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).