public inbox for linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Akira Fujita <a-fujita@rs.jp.nec.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Takashi Sato <t-sato@yk.jp.nec.com>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Review of ext4-online-defrag-move-victim-files.patch
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:38:19 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48D0A5DB.6020103@rs.jp.nec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1KecTT-0004nW-Oc@closure.thunk.org>

Hi Ted,
Thank you for your review comments.

Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I've been looking over the defrag patches with an eye towards getting
> them merged.  This patch concerns me for a number of reasons.  First of
> all, it is calling into a number of private functions which had
> previously been static functions in fs/ext4/balloc.c.  Specifically,
> goal_in_my_reservation(), rsv_window_remove(), rsv_is_empty(),
> alloc_new_reservation(), try_to_extend_reservation().  
> 
> This is bad for a couple of reasons.  First of all, the functions
> weren't renamed, so it results in the namespace leakage.  In general,
> non-static functions should be prefixed by ext4_ so that we know they
> came from the ext4 filesystem code.  Secondly, these were internal
> functions were intended for use in an older set of block allocation
> functions that may be removed in the future --- they had previously only
> been used by the function ext4_old_new_blocks(), which is used only when
> the mount option nomballoc is given.  Given the superiority of the new
> multi-block allocator, it's likely that this old code will be going
> away.
> 
> One of the things which further worries me is that your patch seems to
> be making changes to the mballoc() code as well.  Given that the
> reservations code in fs/ext4/balloc.c was never intended to used at the
> same time as the multi-block allocator code in mballoc(), I suspect
> there will be a problem here if the goal of reserving blocks using the
> reservation code was to prevent some other inode using allocating those
> blocks, since the multi-block allocator does not honor reservations made
> by the reservations code, since normally the reservations code is not
> active when the mballoc code is active (the two are mutually exclusive).

Is there any good way to use block reservation with mballoc?
If not, fixing defragger not to use block reservation
in the force mode would be better.

Regards,
Akira Fujita

      reply	other threads:[~2008-09-17  6:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-09-13 21:16 Review of ext4-online-defrag-move-victim-files.patch Theodore Ts'o
2008-09-17  6:38 ` Akira Fujita [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=48D0A5DB.6020103@rs.jp.nec.com \
    --to=a-fujita@rs.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=t-sato@yk.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=tytso@MIT.EDU \
    /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