From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] xfs: refactor by-size extent allocation mode
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 11:46:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190513154610.GF61135@bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190510173413.GD18992@infradead.org>
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 10:34:13AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > @@ -724,8 +723,6 @@ xfs_alloc_ag_vextent(
> > args->wasfromfl = 0;
> > switch (args->type) {
> > case XFS_ALLOCTYPE_THIS_AG:
> > - error = xfs_alloc_ag_vextent_size(args);
> > - break;
> > case XFS_ALLOCTYPE_NEAR_BNO:
> > case XFS_ALLOCTYPE_THIS_BNO:
> > error = xfs_alloc_ag_vextent_type(args);
> > @@ -817,6 +814,8 @@ xfs_alloc_cur_setup(
> >
> > if (args->agbno != NULLAGBLOCK)
> > agbno = args->agbno;
> > + if (args->type == XFS_ALLOCTYPE_THIS_AG)
> > + acur->cur_len += args->alignment - 1;
>
> At this point we can just kill that switch, or even better
> merge xfs_alloc_ag_vextent_type and xfs_alloc_ag_vextent.
Yeah, we can probably replace that switch with a simple assert on the
allocation type.
WRT to merging the functions, I'm a little concerned about the result
being too large. What do you think about folding in _vextent_type() but
at the same time factoring out the rmap/counter/resv post alloc bits
into an xfs_alloc_ag_vextent_accounting() helper or some such?
Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-13 15:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-09 16:58 [PATCH 0/6] xfs: rework extent allocation Brian Foster
2019-05-09 16:58 ` [PATCH 1/6] xfs: refactor small allocation helper to skip cntbt attempt Brian Foster
2019-05-10 17:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 15:44 ` Brian Foster
2019-05-15 7:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-15 14:41 ` Brian Foster
2019-05-09 16:58 ` [PATCH 2/6] xfs: always update params on small allocation Brian Foster
2019-05-10 17:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-09 16:58 ` [PATCH 3/6] xfs: use locality optimized cntbt lookups for near mode allocations Brian Foster
2019-05-10 17:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 15:45 ` Brian Foster
2019-05-15 7:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-09 16:58 ` [PATCH 4/6] xfs: refactor exact extent allocation mode Brian Foster
2019-05-09 16:58 ` [PATCH 5/6] xfs: refactor by-size " Brian Foster
2019-05-10 17:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 15:46 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2019-05-15 8:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-15 14:42 ` Brian Foster
2019-05-09 16:58 ` [PATCH 6/6] xfs: replace small allocation logic with agfl only logic Brian Foster
2019-05-15 7:53 ` 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=20190513154610.GF61135@bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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