From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934090Ab3B0BFX (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 20:05:23 -0500 Received: from mailout4.samsung.com ([203.254.224.34]:42291 "EHLO mailout4.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932737Ab3B0BFS (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 20:05:18 -0500 X-AuditID: cbfee690-b7f6b6d000004563-b6-512d5bcc661f Message-id: <1361927080.31428.25.camel@kjgkr> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: introduce readahead mode of node pages From: Jaegeuk Kim Reply-to: jaegeuk.kim@samsung.com To: Namjae Jeon Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:04:40 +0900 In-reply-to: References: <1361857068-31613-1-git-send-email-jaegeuk.kim@samsung.com> <1361857068-31613-2-git-send-email-jaegeuk.kim@samsung.com> Organization: samsung Content-type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-4Y2PaV1koSSPLJmK4IcP" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 MIME-version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrKIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t8zY90z0bqBBvcvSlpcv3uL2eLSIneL PXtPslhc3jWHzYHFY+esu+weuxd8ZvL4vEkugDmKyyYlNSezLLVI3y6BK+P11mNsBccFK9rW HmVvYGzl72Lk5JAQMJE40H6fDcIWk7hwbz2QzcUhJLCMUWJ3ax8rTNHZI+eZIBLTGSWmbnkE 5bxmlHg1ZRUTSBWvgK7Ejb51YKOEBVwlHh46BWRzcLAJaEts3m8AEhYSUJR4u/8uK0hYREBN YsKzVJAws0CmxJzXk8HCLAKqEo2L5UDCnALBEit7rkFtOsMo0T/7Ctg9/AKiEidbPzFC9FZJ 7JlxkxniTiWJ3e2d7BDXCEr8mHyPBSL+k13i4vRSEJtFQEDi2+RDLCC7JARkJTYdgGqVlDi4 4gbLBEbxWUimzkIyCSKuKdG6/Tc7hK0tsWzha2YI21Zi3br3UDU2EpuuLmCEsOUltr+dw7yA kX0Vo2hqQXJBcVJ6kYlecWJucWleul5yfu4mRkjcTtjBeO+A9SHGKqATJzJLiSbnA+M+ryTe 0NjYxMzE1MTc0tTclCrCSuK88pdkAoUE0hNLUrNTUwtSi+KLSnNSiw8xMnFwSjUwBnGf3LVt y4q7G2Ut7x2OXmC+48nU3dIq/+dYul1IkP4w28JU6v5dyblh/z1fr2KcstrOP3JzkOv7opyT C05ckxT7+nyvqLCZ/8zanb0rPyl5GkY/+rBCae0LlWe6KTN+BazJTKq2LQkz88urDZr8y/6e 8vbNjwN/uDUfu3WB+Yd+0/IF4t/CVyixFGckGmoxFxUnAgD5xW6sCAMAAA== X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrOKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t9jQd0z0bqBBvM7RSyu373FbHFpkbvF nr0nWSwu75rD5sDisXPWXXaP3Qs+M3l83iQXwBzVwGiTkZqYklqkkJqXnJ+SmZduq+QdHO8c b2pmYKhraGlhrqSQl5ibaqvk4hOg65aZA7RNSaEsMacUKBSQWFyspG+HaUJoiJuuBUxjhK5v SBBcj5EBGkhYx5jxeusxtoLjghVta4+yNzC28ncxcnJICJhInD1yngnCFpO4cG89WxcjF4eQ wHRGialbHjFBOK8ZJV5NWQVWxSugK3Gjbx0biC0s4Crx8NApIJuDg01AW2LzfgOQsJCAosTb /XdZQcIiAmoSE56lgoSZBTIl5ryeDBZmEVCVaFwsBxLmFAiWWNlzDWrTGUaJ/tlXWEES/AKi EidbPzFC9FZJ7JlxkxniTiWJ3e2d7BDXCEr8mHyPZQKj4CwkZbOQpCDimhKt23+zQ9jaEssW vmaGsG0l1q17D1VjI7Hp6gJGCFteYvvbOcwLGNlXMYqmFiQXFCel5xrqFSfmFpfmpesl5+du YgSnhWdSOxhXNlgcYhTgYFTi4V1wSSdQiDWxrLgy9xCjCtCcRxtWX2CUYsnLz0tVEuH9eAAo zZuSWFmVWpQfX1Sak1p8iHEiIzA4JjJLiSbnA5NZXkm8obGJmZGlkZmFkYm5OS2FlcR5GU89 CRASSE8sSc1OTS1ILYI5iomDU6qBcfs7n16ZIzv7UnkaPgTmvXyT8ZY3o/vrjquRjPbpz23O 9rnv2bX1b8qd/ErNrTdzpayCWtv0JXaHbv0zT0V7ipRUXt00p28bFu7Salu//cz86v/ntxir ze68kPDoRe/pd9lzzS+1XWueqXuoJ/dNbIy7rFEwy5s9W8L94x3cvlmcNWBl5Fw9X4mlOCPR UIu5qDgRAIE4VeGKAwAA DLP-Filter: Pass X-MTR: 20000000000000000@CPGS X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-4Y2PaV1koSSPLJmK4IcP Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2013-02-26 (=ED=99=94), 20:52 +0900, Namjae Jeon: > > @@ -434,7 +434,7 @@ int get_dnode_of_data(struct dnode_of_data *dn, pgo= ff_t > > index, int ro) > > alloc_nid_done(sbi, nids[i]); > > mutex_unlock_op(sbi, NODE_NEW); > > done =3D true; > > - } else if (ro && i =3D=3D level && level > 1) { > > + } else if (mode =3D=3D LOOKUP_NODE_RA && i =3D=3D level && level > 1= ) { > > npage[i] =3D get_node_page_ra(parent, offset[i - 1]); > > if (IS_ERR(npage[i])) { > > err =3D PTR_ERR(npage[i]); >=20 > Hi Jaegeuk. > There is no LOOKUP_NODE usage in this patch. > I think that we can use LOOKUP_NODE flag instead of done(bool) like this= . > if (mode =3D=3D LOOKUP_NODE) Hi. In order to do that, we should check additional conditions like i and level together with mode =3D=3D LOOKUP_NODE. So, I'm not sure how much it makes clearer by using LOOKUP_NODE explicitly. It seems fine to me, since we can just use LOOKUP_NODE to distinguish it from the other modes. Any thought? --=20 Jaegeuk Kim Samsung --=-4Y2PaV1koSSPLJmK4IcP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJRLVuoAAoJEEAUqH6CSFDSNY0P/2JboXSPwDNLM+vOu7PiXvOQ c5BkZWBUdwDTN1xTLGyhWOimruGgvW/KUZdTL4pFhVVIJ3D8yT1eeeh4cF9Tgr1r GVmVBxTb3drqLMonP7DVCJDxlhzYl9SaTLwrWDG7I2ppE3HiTq4Sci6E7il8rNlM waW5sINRHaxS9ZsClOAbuDe1LHAp/utDQ4BwFnompy1wycv1MWT1ceF1mQoDk427 7tUIKceQ1oDDveXvPdoMw8j8+0GVD8iuY+T5cFOpuBOHtxUgD75MBK9U2kDKc2JA NtvU22ZKGU2y34h4dR1s6WryEcOW8eCcHAbaGsq4HKR5t/A/vurr8NaccMmeP/YQ tjx8iF7DB6RfkD1g3sfsgSzNjD7imyG9fajRArk2dttnnhx6IyqZ+1yf4RFD0mN7 05JuHAIl7XAiVuj1FSOcEx+NF9oyXIEt49dz4+lRZwpyPBik0oDa3LyTUceW1MOb J9SjeyxK8L2ro7cvl5P5l0HU8fXp5inXhzG0gsgTXMaO/btLqwU0ks0kOV6tWOcY sJpZfLFIsaARbAA5Zy6Chagdcli8bFW6i2xFVDtlt6eN58fQc57V04VgnHuZVi/V qmRuJH8Mcks/+1PL8FwKKS5s6U/DpyaXjMkXSxAP32QuQuxczz/qLes94V4jqu+w r4L0UaGO7a0K6xBGXtRc =EscI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-4Y2PaV1koSSPLJmK4IcP--