From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 06/16] writeback: improve bdi_has_dirty_io
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 15:45:02 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1279284312-2411-7-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1279284312-2411-1-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com>
From: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
This patch is of clean-up type. Currently the purpose of the
'bdi_has_dirty_io()' function is not very clear - it is equivalent
to 'wb_has_dirty_io()' and there is little point for it to exist.
It is used inconsistently as well, e.g., in 'bdi_forker_thread()'
we use
if (wb_has_dirty_io() || !list_empty(&me->bdi->work_list))
but in the other place we use another construct to achieve the
essentially same goal:
if (!bdi_has_dirty_io(bdi) && list_empty(&bdi->work_list))
which is inconsistent and make code more difficult to follow.
This patch changes semantics of 'bdi_has_dirty_io()' a bit, and now
it checks for dirty io _and_ bdi works. The code which needs to check
only dirty inodes can use 'wb_has_dirty_io()'. This makes the bdi
forker code a bit nicer, and justifies the existence of
'bdi_has_dirty_io()'.
Just a small cleanup.
Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
---
fs/fs-writeback.c | 2 +-
mm/backing-dev.c | 10 +++++-----
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
index 5e6b7fc..3fc5194 100644
--- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
+++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
@@ -891,7 +891,7 @@ void wakeup_flusher_threads(long nr_pages)
rcu_read_lock();
list_for_each_entry_rcu(bdi, &bdi_list, bdi_list) {
- if (!bdi_has_dirty_io(bdi))
+ if (!wb_has_dirty_io(&bdi->wb))
continue;
__bdi_start_writeback(bdi, nr_pages, false, false);
}
diff --git a/mm/backing-dev.c b/mm/backing-dev.c
index 8be2e13..03a3d82 100644
--- a/mm/backing-dev.c
+++ b/mm/backing-dev.c
@@ -263,7 +263,8 @@ static void bdi_wb_init(struct bdi_writeback *wb, struct backing_dev_info *bdi)
int bdi_has_dirty_io(struct backing_dev_info *bdi)
{
- return wb_has_dirty_io(&bdi->wb);
+ return wb_has_dirty_io(&bdi->wb) ||
+ !list_empty(&bdi->work_list);
}
static void bdi_flush_io(struct backing_dev_info *bdi)
@@ -338,7 +339,7 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
* Temporary measure, we want to make sure we don't see
* dirty data on the default backing_dev_info
*/
- if (wb_has_dirty_io(me) || !list_empty(&me->bdi->work_list))
+ if (bdi_has_dirty_io(me->bdi))
wb_do_writeback(me, 0);
spin_lock_bh(&bdi_lock);
@@ -350,8 +351,7 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
list_for_each_entry_safe(bdi, tmp, &bdi_list, bdi_list) {
if (bdi->wb.task)
continue;
- if (list_empty(&bdi->work_list) &&
- !bdi_has_dirty_io(bdi))
+ if (!bdi_has_dirty_io(bdi))
continue;
bdi_add_default_flusher_thread(bdi);
@@ -637,7 +637,7 @@ void bdi_destroy(struct backing_dev_info *bdi)
* Splice our entries to the default_backing_dev_info, if this
* bdi disappears
*/
- if (bdi_has_dirty_io(bdi)) {
+ if (wb_has_dirty_io(&bdi->wb)) {
struct bdi_writeback *dst = &default_backing_dev_info.wb;
spin_lock(&inode_lock);
--
1.7.1.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-16 12:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-16 12:44 [RFC][PATCH 00/16] kill unnecessary bdi wakeups + cleanups Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-16 12:44 ` [RFC][PATCH 01/16] writeback: do not self-wakeup Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 6:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-18 9:43 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-16 12:44 ` [RFC][PATCH 02/16] writeback: remove redundant list initialization Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 6:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-16 12:44 ` [RFC][PATCH 03/16] writeback: harmonize writeback threads naming Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 6:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 04/16] writeback: fix possible race when shutting down bdi Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 6:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-20 8:58 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 05/16] writeback: fix possible race when creating bdi threads Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-16 12:45 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2010-07-18 6:49 ` [RFC][PATCH 06/16] writeback: improve bdi_has_dirty_io Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 07/16] writeback: do not lose wake-ups in the forker thread Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 6:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 08/16] writeback: do not lose default bdi wake-ups Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 6:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 09/16] writeback: do not lose wake-ups in bdi threads Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 6:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/16] writeback: simplify bdi code a little Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 6:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-20 10:34 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 11/16] writeback: move last_active to bdi Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 7:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 12/16] writeback: add to bdi_list in the forker thread Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 6:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-20 11:07 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-20 11:32 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 13/16] writeback: restructure bdi forker loop a little Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 14/16] writeback: move bdi threads exiting logic to the forker thread Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 7:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-20 12:23 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-20 12:54 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 15/16] writeback: clean-up the warning about non-registered bdi Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 7:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-16 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 16/16] writeback: prevent unnecessary bdi threads wakeups Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-18 7:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-20 13:13 ` Artem Bityutskiy
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=1279284312-2411-7-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com \
--to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).