From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zheng Liu Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] ext4: Add new data structures and related functions to count io types Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 23:45:55 +0800 Message-ID: <20111111154555.GC6826@gmail.com> References: <1320921294-30321-1-git-send-email-wenqing.lz@taobao.com> <1320921294-30321-3-git-send-email-wenqing.lz@taobao.com> <1321009091.2710.41.camel@menhir> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Zheng Liu , Wang Shaoyan To: Steven Whitehouse Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1321009091.2710.41.camel@menhir> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:58:11AM +0000, Steven Whitehouse wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 18:34 +0800, Zheng Liu wrote: > > From: Zheng Liu > > > > A per-cpu counter is defined to store io types in ext4. We define 10 io types > > in ext4, which includes 9 metadata types and 1 data type. Read and write > > operations are counted separately. When checks 'Issue' flag, filesystem needs > > to lock buffer. > > > > Signed-off-by: Zheng Liu > > Signed-off-by: Wang Shaoyan > > --- > > fs/ext4/ext4.h | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > fs/ext4/super.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h > > index 5b0e26a..39a1495 100644 > > --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h > > +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h > > @@ -1108,6 +1108,23 @@ struct ext4_super_block { > > #define EXT4_MF_FS_ABORTED 0x0002 /* Fatal error detected */ > > > > /* > > + * ext4 io types > > + */ > > +enum { > > + EXT4_IOS_SUPER_BLOCK = 0, > > + EXT4_IOS_GROUP_DESC, > > + EXT4_IOS_INODE_BITMAP, > > + EXT4_IOS_BLOCK_BITMAP, > > + EXT4_IOS_INODE_TABLE, > > + EXT4_IOS_EXTENT_BLOCK, > > + EXT4_IOS_INDIRECT_BLOCK, > > + EXT4_IOS_DIR_ENTRY, > > + EXT4_IOS_EXTENDED_ATTR, > > + EXT4_IOS_REGULAR_DATA, > > + EXT4_IOS_TYPE_END, > > +}; > > + > > +/* > > * fourth extended-fs super-block data in memory > > */ > > struct ext4_sb_info { > > @@ -1284,6 +1301,11 @@ static inline void ext4_set_io_unwritten_flag(struct inode *inode, > > } > > } > > > > +static inline unsigned ext4_blocks_per_page(struct inode *inode) > > +{ > > + return PAGE_CACHE_SIZE >> inode->i_blkbits; > > +} > > + > > /* > > * Inode dynamic state flags > > */ > > @@ -1926,6 +1948,37 @@ extern int ext4_group_extend(struct super_block *sb, > > ext4_fsblk_t n_blocks_count); > > > > /* super.c */ > > +extern void __ext4_io_stat(int, int, unsigned long); > > +#define ext4_ios_read(bh, type, count) \ > > + do { \ > > + if (!bh) \ > > + break; \ > > + lock_buffer(bh); \ > > + if (buffer_issue(bh)) { \ > > + clear_buffer_issue(bh); \ > > + __ext4_io_stat(READ, type, count); \ > > + } \ > > + unlock_buffer(bh); \ > > + } while (0) > Why not just test_and_clear_bit(BH_Issue) ? I don't follow why the > buffer needs to be locked and unlocked, test_and_clear_bit(BH_Issue) is better. Calling lock/unlock_buffer() is to ensure 'Issue' flag can be set or cleared atomically. It is unnecessary after using test_and_clear_bit(BH_Issue). Regards, Zheng > > Steve. > >