From: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: chandan.babu@oracle.com, dchinner@redhat.com, hch@lst.de,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, catherine.hoang@oracle.com,
martin.petersen@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/14] xfs: Do not free EOF blocks for forcealign
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2024 13:33:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f39d240b-7abe-45d6-9d87-553ce8c6cf41@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240806192441.GM623936@frogsfrogsfrogs>
>> +void
>> +xfs_roundout_to_alloc_fsbsize(
>> + struct xfs_inode *ip,
>> + xfs_fileoff_t *start,
>> + xfs_fileoff_t *end)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int blocks = xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize(ip);
>> +
>> + if (blocks == 1)
>> + return;
>> + *start = rounddown_64(*start, blocks);
>> + *end = roundup_64(*end, blocks);
>> +}
>
> This is probably going to start another round of shouting, but I think
> it's silly to do two rounding operations when you only care about one
> value.
Sure, but the "in" version does use the 2x values and I wanted to be
consistent. Anyway, I really don't feel strongly about this.
> In patch 12 it results in a bunch more dummy variables that you
> then ignore.
>
> Can't this be:
>
> static inline xfs_fileoff_t
> xfs_inode_rounddown_alloc_unit(
Just a question about the naming:
xfs_inode_alloc_unitsize() returns bytes, so I would expect
xfs_inode_rounddown_alloc_unit() to deal in bytes. Would you be
satisfied with xfs_rounddown_alloc_fsbsize()? Or any other suggestion?
> struct xfs_inode *ip,
> xfs_fileoff off)
> {
> unsigned int rounding = xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize(ip);
>
> if (rounding == 1)
> return off;
> return rounddown_64(off, rounding);
> }
>
> static inline xfs_fileoff_t
> xfs_inode_roundup_alloc_unit(
> struct xfs_inode *ip,
> xfs_fileoff off)
> {
> unsigned int rounding = xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize(ip);
>
> if (rounding == 1)
> return off;
> return roundup_64(off, rounding);
> }
>
> Then that callsite can be:
>
> end_fsb = xfs_inode_roundup_alloc_unit(ip,
> XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, (xfs_ufsize_t)XFS_ISIZE(ip)));
Thanks,
John
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-07 12:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-01 16:30 [PATCH v3 00/14] forcealign for xfs John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 01/14] xfs: only allow minlen allocations when near ENOSPC John Garry
2024-08-06 18:51 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:26 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 02/14] xfs: always tail align maxlen allocations John Garry
2024-08-13 15:01 ` John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 03/14] xfs: simplify extent allocation alignment John Garry
2024-08-06 18:56 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-06 23:52 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-07 0:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:34 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 04/14] xfs: make EOF allocation simpler John Garry
2024-08-06 18:58 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:00 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-07 0:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 05/14] xfs: introduce forced allocation alignment John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 06/14] xfs: align args->minlen for " John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 07/14] xfs: Introduce FORCEALIGN inode flag John Garry
2024-08-06 19:02 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 11:42 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 14:40 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 08/14] xfs: Update xfs_inode_alloc_unitsize() for forcealign John Garry
2024-08-06 19:02 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 09/14] xfs: Update xfs_setattr_size() " John Garry
2024-08-06 19:03 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 10/14] xfs: Do not free EOF blocks " John Garry
2024-08-06 19:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 12:33 ` John Garry [this message]
2024-08-07 15:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 11/14] xfs: Only free full extents " John Garry
2024-08-06 19:27 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:08 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-07 13:06 ` John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 12/14] xfs: Unmap blocks according to forcealign John Garry
2024-08-06 20:14 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 13:40 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 16:19 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 13/14] xfs: Don't revert allocated offset for forcealign John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 14/14] xfs: Enable file data forcealign feature John Garry
2024-08-06 19:43 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 13:50 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 15:17 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=f39d240b-7abe-45d6-9d87-553ce8c6cf41@oracle.com \
--to=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=catherine.hoang@oracle.com \
--cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).