From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p6C0tdgo001187 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 19:55:39 -0500 Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id B091017B706B for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 17:55:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id GIr1TI43WQ8TbpTO for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 17:55:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 10:55:35 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] xfs: factor out xfs_da_grow_inode_int Message-ID: <20110712005535.GJ23038@dastard> References: <20110710204916.856267100@bombadil.infradead.org> <20110710205017.485558926@bombadil.infradead.org> <20110711003743.GC23038@dastard> <20110711052406.GA13266@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110711052406.GA13266@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 01:24:06AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:37:43AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 04:49:20PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > xfs_da_grow_inode and xfs_dir2_grow_inode are mostly duplicate code. Factor > > > the meat of those two functions into a new common helper. > > > > Hmmmm. I'm in the process of splitting xfs_dir2_grow_inode() into > > data space vs free space variants so I can play speculative > > preallocation tricks in the directory data space to reduce dataspace > > fragmentation for large directories. Combined with a rework of the > > readir readahead code, it significantly reduces IO count and seeks > > for readdir calls... > > > > I'll probably just rebase on top of this patch, though, because I did > > notice that the two functions were very similar to begin with. ;) > > Are you two variants still sharing the core code? Sort of - there's an extra allocation failure case added (multiple directory block size allocation failure), but otherwise is the same. > If yes rebasing sounds > like the better idea. If the two dir2 variants are different enough > from the da variant I'm fine with postponing this one for now. I'll rebase anyway - the code won't be ready for 3.1 because I haven't yet started on the readahead optimisations that better allocation allows. I also need to add dataspace truncation during inactivation so that we don't leave blocks in the data space "beyond EOF" that repair complains about on clean unmounts. And FWIW, I think I now know enough about how this all works to be able to implement online directory data space defragmentation now... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs