From: Chandan Babu R <chandanrlinux@gmail.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, david@fromorbit.com,
hch@infradead.org, allison.henderson@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 12/14] xfs: Compute bmap extent alignments in a separate function
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:56:57 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <802040417.dp7cjt2klD@garuda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201030155212.GQ1061252@magnolia>
On Friday 30 October 2020 9:22:12 PM IST Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 01:46:18PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> > On Friday 30 October 2020 3:51:30 AM IST Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 03:43:46PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> > > > This commit moves over the code which computes stripe alignment and
> > > > extent size hint alignment into a separate function. Apart from
> > > > xfs_bmap_btalloc(), the new function will be used by another function
> > > > introduced in a future commit.
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Allison Henderson <allison.henderson@oracle.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Chandan Babu R <chandanrlinux@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> > > > 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> > > > index 64c4d0e384a5..935f2d506748 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> > > > @@ -3463,13 +3463,58 @@ xfs_bmap_btalloc_accounting(
> > > > args->len);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +static void
> > >
> > > Why not return stripe_align instead of passing pointers?
> >
> > xfs_bmap_exact_minlen_extent_alloc() introduced in the last patch would invoke
> > this function passing NULL value as the third argument i.e. it does not need
> > "stripe alignment" to be computed. Hence xfs_bmap_exact_minlen_extent_alloc()
> > would ignore the return value of xfs_bmap_compute_alignments(). This was the
> > reason for deciding on passing a pointer to the stripe_align variable as an
> > argument.
>
> I would have thought that an out parameter that isn't used by all
> callers would be the perfect use of a return, especially since passing
> by pointer means that the compiler has to spill stripe_align to a memory
> location both here and in the callers and cannot keep the value in
> registers.
You are right. I will implement the change pointed out by you. Thanks once
again for your suggestions.
>
> --D
>
> > >
> > > > +xfs_bmap_compute_alignments(
> > > > + struct xfs_bmalloca *ap,
> > > > + struct xfs_alloc_arg *args,
> > > > + int *stripe_align)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct xfs_mount *mp = args->mp;
> > > > + xfs_extlen_t align = 0; /* minimum allocation alignment */
> > > > + int error;
> > > > +
> > > > + /* stripe alignment for allocation is determined by mount parameters */
> > > > + *stripe_align = 0;
> > > > + if (mp->m_swidth && (mp->m_flags & XFS_MOUNT_SWALLOC))
> > > > + *stripe_align = mp->m_swidth;
> > > > + else if (mp->m_dalign)
> > > > + *stripe_align = mp->m_dalign;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (ap->flags & XFS_BMAPI_COWFORK)
> > > > + align = xfs_get_cowextsz_hint(ap->ip);
> > > > + else if (ap->datatype & XFS_ALLOC_USERDATA)
> > > > + align = xfs_get_extsz_hint(ap->ip);
> > > > + if (align) {
> > > > + error = xfs_bmap_extsize_align(mp, &ap->got, &ap->prev,
> > > > + align, 0, ap->eof, 0, ap->conv,
> > > > + &ap->offset, &ap->length);
> > > > + ASSERT(!error);
> > > > + ASSERT(ap->length);
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > + /* apply extent size hints if obtained earlier */
> > > > + if (align) {
> > > > + args->prod = align;
> > > > + div_u64_rem(ap->offset, args->prod, &args->mod);
> > > > + if (args->mod)
> > > > + args->mod = args->prod - args->mod;
> > > > + } else if (mp->m_sb.sb_blocksize >= PAGE_SIZE) {
> > > > + args->prod = 1;
> > > > + args->mod = 0;
> > > > + } else {
> > > > + args->prod = PAGE_SIZE >> mp->m_sb.sb_blocklog;
> > > > + div_u64_rem(ap->offset, args->prod, &args->mod);
> > > > + if (args->mod)
> > > > + args->mod = args->prod - args->mod;
> > > > + }
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > STATIC int
> > > > xfs_bmap_btalloc(
> > > > struct xfs_bmalloca *ap) /* bmap alloc argument struct */
> > > > {
> > > > xfs_mount_t *mp; /* mount point structure */
> > > > xfs_alloctype_t atype = 0; /* type for allocation routines */
> > > > - xfs_extlen_t align = 0; /* minimum allocation alignment */
> > > > xfs_agnumber_t fb_agno; /* ag number of ap->firstblock */
> > > > xfs_agnumber_t ag;
> > > > xfs_alloc_arg_t args;
> > > > @@ -3489,25 +3534,11 @@ xfs_bmap_btalloc(
> > > >
> > > > mp = ap->ip->i_mount;
> > > >
> > > > - /* stripe alignment for allocation is determined by mount parameters */
> > > > - stripe_align = 0;
> > > > - if (mp->m_swidth && (mp->m_flags & XFS_MOUNT_SWALLOC))
> > > > - stripe_align = mp->m_swidth;
> > > > - else if (mp->m_dalign)
> > > > - stripe_align = mp->m_dalign;
> > > > -
> > > > - if (ap->flags & XFS_BMAPI_COWFORK)
> > > > - align = xfs_get_cowextsz_hint(ap->ip);
> > > > - else if (ap->datatype & XFS_ALLOC_USERDATA)
> > > > - align = xfs_get_extsz_hint(ap->ip);
> > > > - if (align) {
> > > > - error = xfs_bmap_extsize_align(mp, &ap->got, &ap->prev,
> > > > - align, 0, ap->eof, 0, ap->conv,
> > > > - &ap->offset, &ap->length);
> > > > - ASSERT(!error);
> > > > - ASSERT(ap->length);
> > > > - }
> > > > + memset(&args, 0, sizeof(args));
> > > > + args.tp = ap->tp;
> > > > + args.mp = mp;
> > >
> > > FWIW you might as well clean up the variable declarations while you're
> > > moving this stuff around:
> > >
> > > STATIC int
> > > xfs_bmap_btalloc(
> > > struct xfs_bmalloca *ap)
> > > {
> > > struct xfs_mount *mp = ap->ip->i_mount;
> > > struct xfs_alloc_arg args = { .tp = ap->tp, .mp = mp };
> > >
> > > And then you can get rid of the memset call.
> >
> > Sure, I will make the changes that have been suggested.
> >
> > >
> > > AFAICT there aren't any data dependencies between the parts where we
> > > initialize args.fsbno and where we set args.prod and args.mod, so I
> > > guess this is a reasonable hoist.
> > >
> > > Other than those cleanups, this looks ok to me.
> > >
> > > --D
> > >
> > > >
> > > > + xfs_bmap_compute_alignments(ap, &args, &stripe_align);
> > > >
> > > > nullfb = ap->tp->t_firstblock == NULLFSBLOCK;
> > > > fb_agno = nullfb ? NULLAGNUMBER : XFS_FSB_TO_AGNO(mp,
> > > > @@ -3538,9 +3569,6 @@ xfs_bmap_btalloc(
> > > > * Normal allocation, done through xfs_alloc_vextent.
> > > > */
> > > > tryagain = isaligned = 0;
> > > > - memset(&args, 0, sizeof(args));
> > > > - args.tp = ap->tp;
> > > > - args.mp = mp;
> > > > args.fsbno = ap->blkno;
> > > > args.oinfo = XFS_RMAP_OINFO_SKIP_UPDATE;
> > > >
> > > > @@ -3571,21 +3599,7 @@ xfs_bmap_btalloc(
> > > > args.total = ap->total;
> > > > args.minlen = ap->minlen;
> > > > }
> > > > - /* apply extent size hints if obtained earlier */
> > > > - if (align) {
> > > > - args.prod = align;
> > > > - div_u64_rem(ap->offset, args.prod, &args.mod);
> > > > - if (args.mod)
> > > > - args.mod = args.prod - args.mod;
> > > > - } else if (mp->m_sb.sb_blocksize >= PAGE_SIZE) {
> > > > - args.prod = 1;
> > > > - args.mod = 0;
> > > > - } else {
> > > > - args.prod = PAGE_SIZE >> mp->m_sb.sb_blocklog;
> > > > - div_u64_rem(ap->offset, args.prod, &args.mod);
> > > > - if (args.mod)
> > > > - args.mod = args.prod - args.mod;
> > > > - }
> > > > +
> > > > /*
> > > > * If we are not low on available data blocks, and the underlying
> > > > * logical volume manager is a stripe, and the file offset is zero then
> > >
> >
> >
>
--
chandan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-30 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-29 10:13 [PATCH V8 00/14] Bail out if transaction can cause extent count to overflow Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 01/14] xfs: Add helper for checking per-inode extent count overflow Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 02/14] xfs: Check for extent overflow when trivally adding a new extent Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 03/14] xfs: Check for extent overflow when punching a hole Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 04/14] xfs: Check for extent overflow when adding/removing xattrs Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 05/14] xfs: Check for extent overflow when adding/removing dir entries Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 06/14] xfs: Check for extent overflow when writing to unwritten extent Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 07/14] xfs: Check for extent overflow when moving extent from cow to data fork Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 08/14] xfs: Check for extent overflow when remapping an extent Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 09/14] xfs: Check for extent overflow when swapping extents Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 10/14] xfs: Introduce error injection to reduce maximum inode fork extent count Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 11/14] xfs: Remove duplicate assert statement in xfs_bmap_btalloc() Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 12/14] xfs: Compute bmap extent alignments in a separate function Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 22:21 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-10-30 8:16 ` Chandan Babu R
2020-10-30 15:52 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-10-30 16:26 ` Chandan Babu R [this message]
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 13/14] xfs: Process allocated extent " Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 22:22 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-10-29 10:13 ` [PATCH V8 14/14] xfs: Introduce error injection to allocate only minlen size extents for files Chandan Babu R
2020-10-29 22:33 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-10-30 8:17 ` Chandan Babu R
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=802040417.dp7cjt2klD@garuda \
--to=chandanrlinux@gmail.com \
--cc=allison.henderson@oracle.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.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