From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p8L6in7u122347 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 01:44:49 -0500 Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id D44941608544 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 23:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id aDFPsCgw3DE0FBPR for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 23:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:44:43 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] xfs: Don't allocate new buffers on every call to _xfs_buf_find Message-ID: <20110921064443.GO15688@dastard> References: <1314341497-23910-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1314341497-23910-2-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20110826081132.GA3551@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110826081132.GA3551@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 04:11:32AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c > > index c57836d..594cea5 100644 > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c > > @@ -171,10 +171,16 @@ STATIC void > > _xfs_buf_initialize( > > xfs_buf_t *bp, > > xfs_buftarg_t *target, > > - xfs_off_t range_base, > > - size_t range_length, > > + xfs_off_t bno, > > + size_t num_blocks, > > xfs_buf_flags_t flags) > > { > > + xfs_off_t range_base; > > + size_t range_length; > > + > > + range_base = BBTOB(bno); > > + range_length = BBTOB(num_blocks); > > What is the point of changing the mostly unrelated _xfs_buf_initialize > prototype in this patch? We were converting units backwards and forwards inconsistently, some functions taking bytes, some basic blocks, and conversions were being done all over the place. > I think it (and the other renaming changes related to it) are fine, > but should be a separate patch. OK, fine, I can do that. > And once you touch _xfs_buf_initialize > after the core of this patch, please merge it with xfs_buf_allocate into > a new xfs_buf_alloc that does the full allocation + initialization and > can also replace xfs_buf_get_empty. Not right now. That restructing can be done separately, probably in the same patch set that fixes the API types problems... > > + bp = _xfs_buf_find(target, bno, num_blocks, flags, new_bp); > > + if (!bp) { > > + xfs_buf_deallocate(new_bp); > > + return NULL; > > + } > > + > > if (bp == new_bp) { > > error = xfs_buf_allocate_memory(bp, flags); > > if (error) > > goto no_buffer; > > + } else > > xfs_buf_deallocate(new_bp); > > I'd recommend moving the call to xfs_buf_allocate_memory into > _xfs_buf_find so that it returns a fully allocated buffer. In fact I'd > also move the xfs_buf_deallocate(new_bp) into the found side of > _xfs_buf_find, avoiding any conditionals in xfs_buf_get. This code s pretty much as you requested it after the first time I posted it. http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2011-08/msg00146.html I'll go rewrite this again, but IMO all you are asking for is for me to put a different colour on the bike shed.... > > > > - XFS_STATS_INC(xb_get); > > - > > /* > > - * Always fill in the block number now, the mapped cases can do > > - * their own overlay of this later. > > + * Now we have a workable buffer, fill in the block number so > > + * that we can do IO on it. > > */ > > - bp->b_bn = ioff; > > - bp->b_count_desired = bp->b_buffer_length; > > + bp->b_bn = bno; > > Note that we only need this if we did not find an existing buffer. It's > not strictly related to the patch, but given that you stop assigning > b_count_desired and redo this whole area it might be worth shifting it > into the if (bp == new_bp) conditional area. OK. > > > > +found: > > + ASSERT(bp->b_flags & XBF_MAPPED); > > This doesn't look right to me. Various buffers like inode or remoate attrs > are unmapped, and I can't see any reason why we would assert not beeing > allowed to find them here. Yeah, a bit of a thinko, but it never tripped on me.... > Thinking about it more I'm also not sure skipping the code to map > buffers on a straight cache hit is a good idea - there's nothing > inherent to requiring a given buffer to be mapped for all callers. OK, will fix. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs