From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] xfs: reduce the number of pagb_lock roundtrips in xfs_alloc_clear_busy
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 11:13:40 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110429011340.GX12436@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1303923381.2056.58.camel@doink>
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:56:21AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 15:06 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Instead of finding the per-ag and then taking and releasing the pagb_lock
> > for every single busy extent completed sort the list of busy extents and
> > only switch betweens AGs where nessecary. This becomes especially important
> > with the online discard support which will hit this lock more often.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>
> I said this looked good before, but since you haven't
> indicated that here yet, I'll make one more comment.
>
> Both places that call (the new) xfs_alloc_busy_clear()
> precede the call with a call to xfs_alloc_busy_sort().
> Considering that, and the fact that xfs_alloc_busy_clear()
> depends on the list being sorted for correct (or at least
> efficient) operation, I think you should just embed the
> list_sort() call in xfs_alloc_busy_clear().
>
> There would then be no real need to define the
> xfs_alloc_busy_sort() helper (just call list_sort()
> directly), and you can move the definition of
> xfs_busy_extent_ag_cmp() up in the file and give
> it private scope.
I agree with this - sorting the list externally just seems to
complicate the API and means callers need to remember to sort the
list first...
Otherwise,
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-29 1:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-24 19:06 [PATCH 0/4] improved busy extent handling V5 Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-24 19:06 ` [PATCH 1/4] xfs: optimize AGFL refills Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-29 0:41 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-24 19:06 ` [PATCH 2/4] xfs: do not immediately reuse busy extent ranges Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-29 0:58 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-24 19:06 ` [PATCH 3/4] xfs: exact busy extent tracking Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-29 1:10 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-24 19:06 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs: reduce the number of pagb_lock roundtrips in xfs_alloc_clear_busy Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-27 16:56 ` Alex Elder
2011-04-27 19:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-29 1:13 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-04-18 6:59 [PATCH 0/4] improved busy extent handling V4 Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-18 6:59 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs: reduce the number of pagb_lock roundtrips in xfs_alloc_clear_busy Christoph Hellwig
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=20110429011340.GX12436@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=aelder@sgi.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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