Bob and Steve,
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
>> Most of this looks good. However, two comments:
>>
>> 1. I don't like adding a new u16 to the gfs2_inode. I've been working to
>> reduce the size of gfs2's inodes lately, so I'd rather see this
>> implemented as a
Hi,
On 03/11/15 17:29, Bob Peterson wrote:
- Original Message -
When gfs2 allocates an inode and its extended attribute block next to
each other at inode create time, the inode's directory entry indicates
that in de_rahead. In that case, we can readahead the extended
attribute block wh
- Original Message -
> When gfs2 allocates an inode and its extended attribute block next to
> each other at inode create time, the inode's directory entry indicates
> that in de_rahead. In that case, we can readahead the extended
> attribute block when we read in the inode.
>
> Signed-of
Before this patch, multi-block reservation structures were allocated
from a special slab. This patch folds the structure into the gfs2_inode
structure. The disadvantage is that the gfs2_inode needs more memory,
even when a file is opened read-only. The advantages are: (a) we don't
need the special
Commit 2b3dcf3 (GFS2: Increase i_writecount during gfs2_setattr_size)
added a bunch of calls to get_write_access() in order to ensure file close
could not delete an inode's multi-block reservation while the function
was running. For example, close was interfering with setattr_size.
The patch worked
This patch basically reverts the majority of patch 5407e24.
That patch eliminated the gfs2_qadata structure in favor of just
using the reservations structure. The problem with doing that is that
it increases the size of the reservations structure. That is not an
issue until it comes time to fold th
This patch makes no functional changes. Its goal is to reduce the
size of the gfs2 inode in memory by rearranging structures and
changing the size of some variables within the structure.
Signed-off-by: Bob Peterson
---
fs/gfs2/file.c | 2 +-
fs/gfs2/glock.c | 10 +-
fs/gfs2/glock.h