[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141125211433.GB28449@thunk.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:14:33 -0500
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix suboptimal seek_{data,hole} extents traversial
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 05:25:34PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> It is rediculus practice to scan inode block by block, this technique
> applicable only for old indirect files. This takes signifficant amount
> of time for really large files. Let's reuse ext4_fiemap which already
> traverse inode-tree in most optimal meaner.
>
> TESTCASE:
> ftruncate64(fd, 0);
> ftruncate64(fd, 1ULL << 40);
> /* lseek will spin very long time */
> lseek64(fd, 0, SEEK_DATA);
> lseek64(fd, 0, SEEK_HOLE);
>
>
> Original report: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/16/620
>
> ##################################
> BTW: Why do we need i_mutex here?
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>
Note: this patch causes generic/285 to loop forever in inline-data
mode. My guess is in the special case handling of inline data in
ext4_fiemap not playing well with this change, but I haven't had a
chance to look deeply into this yet.
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists