[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46CB527B.5090300@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:00:43 -0500
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] mballoc patches
Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>
>
> I am attaching below the PATCH 2/4 in .gz format. The uncompressed one
> got dropped by the list.
>
> -aneesh
hmm makes it hard to comment in-line though :) So basing this on the
patch currently in the git repo.
+/*
+ * default stripe size = 1MB
+ */
+#define MB_DEFAULT_STRIPE 256
Units? Doesn't seem to matter anyway as it's never referenced.
+ /* tunables */
+ unsigned long s_mb_factor;
+ unsigned long s_stripe;
+ unsigned long s_mb_small_req;
+ unsigned long s_mb_large_req;
+ unsigned long s_mb_max_to_scan;
+ unsigned long s_mb_min_to_scan;
could we get some comments here as to what these are, and what units?
Same is true many places... for example
+static int mb_find_extent(struct ext4_buddy *e3b, int order, int block,
+ int needed, struct ext4_free_extent *ex)
how many "what" are needed?
And perhaps an addition of the new mount options to
Documentation/fs/ext4.txt would be good.
+#define EXT4_MB_BITMAP(e3b) ((e3b)->bd_bitmap)
+#define EXT4_MB_BUDDY(e3b) ((e3b)->bd_buddy)
For the sake of consistency should these (and others) be e4b?
Also there are a *lot* of BUGs and BUG_ONs added in this patch... are
none of these recoverable?
Thanks,
-Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists