public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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