Mingming Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Here is the updated patch from Badari for delayed allocation for ext3.
> Delayed allocation defers block allocation from prepare-write time to
> page writeout time.
For data=writeback only, yes?
> ...
> --- linux-2.6.12/fs/ext3/inode.c~ext3-delalloc 2005-07-14
> 23:15:34.866752480 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.12-ming/fs/ext3/inode.c 2005-07-14 23:15:34.889748984 -0700
> @@ -1340,6 +1340,9 @@ static int ext3_prepare_write(struct fil
> handle_t *handle;
> int retries = 0;
>
> +
> + if (test_opt(inode->i_sb, DELAYED_ALLOC))
> + return __nobh_prepare_write(page, from, to, ext3_get_block, 0);
Rather than performing this test on each ->prepare_write(), would it not be
better to set up a new set of address_space_operations for this mode?
__nobh_prepare_write() seems like a poor choice of name?
> retry:
> handle = ext3_journal_start(inode, needed_blocks);
> if (IS_ERR(handle)) {
> @@ -1439,6 +1442,9 @@ static int ext3_writeback_commit_write(s
> else
> ret = generic_commit_write(file, page, from, to);
>
> + if (test_opt(inode->i_sb, DELAYED_ALLOC))
> + return ret;
> +
Here too, perhaps.
> + }
> + }
> /*
> * The journal_load will have done any necessary log recovery,
> * so we can safely mount the rest of the filesystem now.
> diff -puN fs/buffer.c~ext3-delalloc fs/buffer.c
> --- linux-2.6.12/fs/buffer.c~ext3-delalloc 2005-07-14 23:15:34.875751112
> -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.12-ming/fs/buffer.c 2005-07-14 23:15:34.903746856 -0700
> @@ -2337,8 +2337,8 @@ static void end_buffer_read_nobh(struct
> * On entry, the page is fully not uptodate.
> * On exit the page is fully uptodate in the areas outside (from,to)
> */
> -int nobh_prepare_write(struct page *page, unsigned from, unsigned to,
> - get_block_t *get_block)
> +int __nobh_prepare_write(struct page *page, unsigned from, unsigned to,
> + get_block_t *get_block, int create)
Suggest you make this static and update the comment.
> {
> struct inode *inode = page->mapping->host;
> const unsigned blkbits = inode->i_blkbits;
> @@ -2370,10 +2370,8 @@ int nobh_prepare_write(struct page *page
> block_start < PAGE_CACHE_SIZE;
> block_in_page++, block_start += blocksize) {
> unsigned block_end = block_start + blocksize;
> - int create;
>
> map_bh.b_state = 0;
> - create = 1;
> if (block_start >= to)
> create = 0;
> ret = get_block(inode, block_in_file + block_in_page,
What's going on here? Seems that we'll call get_block() with `create=0'.
Is there any point in doing that? For delayed allocation we shuld be able
to skip get_block() altogether here and, err, delay it.
> +int nobh_prepare_write(struct page *page, unsigned from, unsigned
> + get_block_t *get_block)
> +{
> + return __nobh_prepare_write(page, from, to, get_block, 1);
> +}
> +
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(nobh_prepare_write);
Here you add nobh_dalloc_prepare_write() and remember to export it to
modules this time ;)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
