From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 0/5] btrfs-progs: separate BLOCK_GROUP_TREE feature from extent-tree-v2
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 14:03:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cover.1660024949.git.wqu@suse.com> (raw)
[CHANGELOG]
v3:
- Add the artificial dependency for block group tree
Now free-space-tree and no-holes must be enabled to use block group
tree feature.
This is for both mkfs and btrfstune.
v2:
- Add the ability to convert to bg tree using btrfstune
Unlike the original patches years ago, which goes one transaction to
convert the full fs to bg tree, this new method goes
multi-transaction.
After converting every 64 block groups, we will commit a transaction
to avoid doing too much work in one trans.
And the new convert will have fs_info->last_convert_bg_byter to record
which bgs have been converted.
This allows any bgs beyond above value to go new bg tree, while bgs
before that threshold to go regular extent tree.
The only concern is, the new method is pretty large in one single
patch (+427/-27), which is not easy to review.
I hope to get some feedback before adding the convert from bg tree
(aka, convert from bg tree to regular extent tree).
The block group tree idea is introduced to greatly reduce mount time for
large fs, over SEVERN years ago.
And 4 years ago, it's determined to let extent-tree-v2 to implement the
feature.
However extent tree v2 still doesn't have a consistent on-disk format,
nor any implementation on the real extent items, nor any tests on some
independent sub-features.
I strongly doubt if that's a correct decision, especially considering
there is really no dependency from extent tree v2 on this block group
tree feature.
Not to mention this is against the common idea on progressive
improvement.
So now is the time to revive the independent block group compat RO flag.
[CHANGE FROM EXTENT-TREE-V2]
- Don't store block group root into super block
There is no special reason for block group root to be stored in super
block.
- Separate block-group-tree as a compat RO flag from extent-tree-v2
The change to extent tree is not affecting read-only opeartions.
No reason to make it incompat.
- Fix a bug in extent-tree-v2 which doesn't initialize block group item
correctly.
Since we're re-using the existing block group item structure, we
should properly initialize chunk_objectid to 256, or tree block
will reject it.
- Dynamically arrange the mkfs_block array
Instead a completely new array dedicated for extent-tree-v2, now we
have proper helpers to add/delete block from the array on-the-fly.
[TODO]
- Add btrfstune support to convert from block-group-tree feature
The infrastructure is already done.
Qu Wenruo (5):
btrfs-progs: mkfs: dynamically modify mkfs blocks array
btrfs-progs: don't save block group root into super block
btrfs-progs: separate block group tree from extent tree v2
btrfs-progs: btrfstune: add the ability to convert to block group tree
feature
btrfs-progs: mkfs: add artificial dependency for block group tree
Documentation/btrfstune.rst | 5 +
btrfstune.c | 148 ++++++++++++++++++++-
check/main.c | 8 +-
cmds/inspect-dump-tree.c | 11 --
common/fsfeatures.c | 8 ++
common/fsfeatures.h | 2 +
kernel-shared/ctree.c | 8 ++
kernel-shared/ctree.h | 55 ++++----
kernel-shared/disk-io.c | 103 +++++----------
kernel-shared/disk-io.h | 5 +-
kernel-shared/extent-tree.c | 247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
kernel-shared/print-tree.c | 11 +-
mkfs/common.c | 113 ++++++++++++++---
mkfs/common.h | 20 +--
mkfs/main.c | 10 +-
15 files changed, 578 insertions(+), 176 deletions(-)
--
2.37.0
next reply other threads:[~2022-08-09 6:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-09 6:03 Qu Wenruo [this message]
2022-08-09 6:03 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] btrfs-progs: mkfs: dynamically modify mkfs blocks array Qu Wenruo
2022-08-09 6:03 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] btrfs-progs: don't save block group root into super block Qu Wenruo
2022-08-09 6:03 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] btrfs-progs: separate block group tree from extent tree v2 Qu Wenruo
2022-08-31 19:14 ` David Sterba
2022-08-31 21:43 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-09-01 12:15 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-09-02 9:21 ` David Sterba
2022-09-02 9:37 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-09-02 12:10 ` David Sterba
2022-10-03 14:48 ` Anand Jain
2022-10-03 23:28 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-10-04 0:05 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-08-09 6:03 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] btrfs-progs: btrfstune: add the ability to convert to block group tree feature Qu Wenruo
2022-08-09 6:03 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] btrfs-progs: mkfs: add artificial dependency for block group tree Qu Wenruo
2022-08-31 18:26 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] btrfs-progs: separate BLOCK_GROUP_TREE feature from extent-tree-v2 David Sterba
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=cover.1660024949.git.wqu@suse.com \
--to=wqu@suse.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).