From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Jeff Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: "xfs@oss.sgi.com" <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix the wrong new_size/rnew_size at xfs_iext_realloc_direct()
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 10:56:57 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130923005657.GN12541@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <523EA96B.3040904@oracle.com>
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:25:15PM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote:
> From: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com>
>
> At xfs_iext_realloc_direct(), the new_size is changed by adding
> if_bytes if originally the extent records are stored at the inline
> extent buffer, and we have to switch from it to a direct extent
> list for those new allocated extents, this is wrong. e.g,
>
> Create a file with three extents which was showing as following,
>
> xfs_io -f -c "truncate 100m" /xfs/testme
>
> for i in $(seq 0 5 10); do
> offset=$(($i * $((1 << 20))))
> xfs_io -c "pwrite $offset 1m" /xfs/testme
> done
>
> Inline
> ------
> irec: if_bytes bytes_diff new_size
> 1st 0 16 16
> 2nd 16 16 32
>
> Switching
> --------- rnew_size
> 3rd 32 16 48 + 32 = 80 roundup=128
>
> In this case, the desired value of new_size should be 48, and then
> it will be roundup to 64 and be assigned to rnew_size.
Ok, so it allocates 128 bytes instead of 64 bytes. It tracks that
allocation size correctly ifp->if_real_bytes, and all it means is
that there are 4 empty extra slots in the extent array. The code
already handles having empty slots in the direct extent array, so
what impact is there as a result of the oversized initial allocation
that is currently happening?
i.e. if fixing the oversized results in more memory allocations due
to resizing more regularly, then is there a benefit to changing this
code given that the rewrite of the ifp->if_bytes value in the case
where we do inline->direct conversion prevents this over-allocation
from being a problem...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
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:[~2013-09-23 0:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-22 8:25 [PATCH] xfs: fix the wrong new_size/rnew_size at xfs_iext_realloc_direct() Jeff Liu
2013-09-23 0:56 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2013-09-23 4:47 ` Jeff Liu
2013-09-23 23:56 ` Dave Chinner
2013-09-24 12:57 ` Jeff Liu
2013-09-24 23:44 ` Dave Chinner
2013-10-01 22:33 ` Ben Myers
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=20130923005657.GN12541@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jeff.liu@oracle.com \
--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