From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
Cc: chandan.babu@oracle.com, dchinner@redhat.com, hch@lst.de,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, catherine.hoang@oracle.com,
martin.petersen@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/14] xfs: Do not free EOF blocks for forcealign
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 12:24:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240806192441.GM623936@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240801163057.3981192-11-john.g.garry@oracle.com>
On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 04:30:53PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> For when forcealign is enabled, we want the EOF to be aligned as well, so
> do not free EOF blocks.
>
> Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org> #earlier version
> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c | 7 +++++--
> fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c
> index fe2e2c930975..60389ac8bd45 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c
> @@ -496,6 +496,7 @@ xfs_can_free_eofblocks(
> struct xfs_mount *mp = ip->i_mount;
> xfs_fileoff_t end_fsb;
> xfs_fileoff_t last_fsb;
> + xfs_fileoff_t dummy_fsb;
> int nimaps = 1;
> int error;
>
> @@ -537,8 +538,10 @@ xfs_can_free_eofblocks(
> * forever.
> */
> end_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, (xfs_ufsize_t)XFS_ISIZE(ip));
> - if (xfs_inode_has_bigrtalloc(ip))
> - end_fsb = xfs_rtb_roundup_rtx(mp, end_fsb);
> +
> + /* Only try to free beyond the allocation unit that crosses EOF */
> + xfs_roundout_to_alloc_fsbsize(ip, &dummy_fsb, &end_fsb);
> +
> last_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, mp->m_super->s_maxbytes);
> if (last_fsb <= end_fsb)
> return false;
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> index 5af12f35062d..d765dedebc15 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> @@ -3129,6 +3129,20 @@ xfs_inode_alloc_unitsize(
> return XFS_FSB_TO_B(ip->i_mount, xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize(ip));
> }
>
> +void
> +xfs_roundout_to_alloc_fsbsize(
> + struct xfs_inode *ip,
> + xfs_fileoff_t *start,
> + xfs_fileoff_t *end)
> +{
> + unsigned int blocks = xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize(ip);
> +
> + if (blocks == 1)
> + return;
> + *start = rounddown_64(*start, blocks);
> + *end = roundup_64(*end, blocks);
> +}
This is probably going to start another round of shouting, but I think
it's silly to do two rounding operations when you only care about one
value. In patch 12 it results in a bunch more dummy variables that you
then ignore.
Can't this be:
static inline xfs_fileoff_t
xfs_inode_rounddown_alloc_unit(
struct xfs_inode *ip,
xfs_fileoff off)
{
unsigned int rounding = xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize(ip);
if (rounding == 1)
return off;
return rounddown_64(off, rounding);
}
static inline xfs_fileoff_t
xfs_inode_roundup_alloc_unit(
struct xfs_inode *ip,
xfs_fileoff off)
{
unsigned int rounding = xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize(ip);
if (rounding == 1)
return off;
return roundup_64(off, rounding);
}
Then that callsite can be:
end_fsb = xfs_inode_roundup_alloc_unit(ip,
XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, (xfs_ufsize_t)XFS_ISIZE(ip)));
--D
> +
> /* Should we always be using copy on write for file writes? */
> bool
> xfs_is_always_cow_inode(
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h
> index 158afad8c7a4..7f86c4781bd8 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h
> @@ -643,6 +643,8 @@ void xfs_inode_count_blocks(struct xfs_trans *tp, struct xfs_inode *ip,
> xfs_filblks_t *dblocks, xfs_filblks_t *rblocks);
> unsigned int xfs_inode_alloc_fsbsize(struct xfs_inode *ip);
> unsigned int xfs_inode_alloc_unitsize(struct xfs_inode *ip);
> +void xfs_roundout_to_alloc_fsbsize(struct xfs_inode *ip,
> + xfs_fileoff_t *start, xfs_fileoff_t *end);
>
> int xfs_icreate_dqalloc(const struct xfs_icreate_args *args,
> struct xfs_dquot **udqpp, struct xfs_dquot **gdqpp,
> --
> 2.31.1
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-06 19:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-01 16:30 [PATCH v3 00/14] forcealign for xfs John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 01/14] xfs: only allow minlen allocations when near ENOSPC John Garry
2024-08-06 18:51 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:26 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 02/14] xfs: always tail align maxlen allocations John Garry
2024-08-13 15:01 ` John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 03/14] xfs: simplify extent allocation alignment John Garry
2024-08-06 18:56 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-06 23:52 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-07 0:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:34 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 04/14] xfs: make EOF allocation simpler John Garry
2024-08-06 18:58 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:00 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-07 0:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 05/14] xfs: introduce forced allocation alignment John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 06/14] xfs: align args->minlen for " John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 07/14] xfs: Introduce FORCEALIGN inode flag John Garry
2024-08-06 19:02 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 11:42 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 14:40 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 08/14] xfs: Update xfs_inode_alloc_unitsize() for forcealign John Garry
2024-08-06 19:02 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 09/14] xfs: Update xfs_setattr_size() " John Garry
2024-08-06 19:03 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 10/14] xfs: Do not free EOF blocks " John Garry
2024-08-06 19:24 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2024-08-07 12:33 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 15:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 11/14] xfs: Only free full extents " John Garry
2024-08-06 19:27 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 0:08 ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-07 13:06 ` John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 12/14] xfs: Unmap blocks according to forcealign John Garry
2024-08-06 20:14 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 13:40 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 16:19 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 13/14] xfs: Don't revert allocated offset for forcealign John Garry
2024-08-01 16:30 ` [PATCH v3 14/14] xfs: Enable file data forcealign feature John Garry
2024-08-06 19:43 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-08-07 13:50 ` John Garry
2024-08-07 15:17 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=20240806192441.GM623936@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=catherine.hoang@oracle.com \
--cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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