From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143] helo=radon.swed.at) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ZMMmg-0000UY-P2 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 03 Aug 2015 20:56:35 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/35] ubifs: extend budget for blocks To: Dongsheng Yang , viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, jack@suse.cz, dedekind1@gmail.com, richard.weinberger@gmail.com References: <1438235311-23788-1-git-send-email-yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <1438235311-23788-15-git-send-email-yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org From: Richard Weinberger Message-ID: <55BFD56B.3070904@nod.at> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 22:56:11 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1438235311-23788-15-git-send-email-yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Am 30.07.2015 um 07:48 schrieb Dongsheng Yang: > Currently, budget subsystem in ubifs are working on budgeting > page-by-page. But sometimes we want to budget a space for one > block, e.g for quota file writing. So this commit extend budget > subsystem to support blocks budgeting and releasing. > > Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang > --- > fs/ubifs/budget.c | 4 ++++ > fs/ubifs/debug.c | 2 ++ > fs/ubifs/super.c | 1 + > fs/ubifs/ubifs.h | 5 +++++ > 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/budget.c b/fs/ubifs/budget.c > index 11a11b3..ba4e530 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/budget.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/budget.c > @@ -397,6 +397,8 @@ static int calc_data_growth(const struct ubifs_info *c, > data_growth += c->bi.page_budget; > if (req->new_dent) > data_growth += c->bi.dent_budget; > + if (req->new_block_num) > + data_growth += c->bi.block_budget * req->new_block_num; > data_growth += req->new_ino_d; > return data_growth; > } > @@ -418,6 +420,8 @@ static int calc_dd_growth(const struct ubifs_info *c, > dd_growth += c->bi.inode_budget << (req->dirtied_ino - 1); > if (req->mod_dent) > dd_growth += c->bi.dent_budget; > + if (req->dirtied_block_num) > + dd_growth += c->bi.block_budget * req->dirtied_block_num; > dd_growth += req->dirtied_ino_d; > return dd_growth; > } > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/debug.c b/fs/ubifs/debug.c > index 4c46a98..cafd592 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/debug.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/debug.c > @@ -556,6 +556,8 @@ void ubifs_dump_budget_req(const struct ubifs_budget_req *req) > req->new_page, req->dirtied_page); > pr_err("\tnew_dent %d, mod_dent %d\n", > req->new_dent, req->mod_dent); > + pr_err("\tnew_block %d, dirtied_block %d\n", > + req->new_block_num, req->dirtied_block_num); > pr_err("\tidx_growth %d\n", req->idx_growth); > pr_err("\tdata_growth %d dd_growth %d\n", > req->data_growth, req->dd_growth); > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/super.c b/fs/ubifs/super.c > index c643261..eb04e42 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/super.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/super.c > @@ -698,6 +698,7 @@ static int init_constants_sb(struct ubifs_info *c) > c->bi.page_budget = UBIFS_MAX_DATA_NODE_SZ * UBIFS_BLOCKS_PER_PAGE; > c->bi.inode_budget = UBIFS_INO_NODE_SZ; > c->bi.dent_budget = UBIFS_MAX_DENT_NODE_SZ; > + c->bi.block_budget = UBIFS_MAX_DATA_NODE_SZ; > > /* > * When the amount of flash space used by buds becomes > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h b/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h > index 3b5e932..71b79b5 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h > +++ b/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h > @@ -861,6 +861,8 @@ struct ubifs_compressor { > * @new_ino_d: how much data newly created inode contains > * @dirtied_ino: how many inodes the operation makes dirty > * @dirtied_ino_d: how much data dirtied inode contains > + * @new_block_num: how many new blocks > + * @dirtied_block_num: how many dirtied blocks What are the semantics of these new fields? e.g. is it allowed to set both new_block_num and new_dent? > * @idx_growth: how much the index will supposedly grow > * @data_growth: how much new data the operation will supposedly add > * @dd_growth: how much data that makes other data dirty the operation will > @@ -902,6 +904,8 @@ struct ubifs_budget_req { > unsigned int dirtied_ino; > unsigned int dirtied_ino_d; > #endif > + unsigned int new_block_num; > + unsigned int dirtied_block_num; Why are these not under UBIFS_DEBUG? I like the overflow checks. Thanks, //richard