[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5481F1A1.50609@codeaurora.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 19:55:45 +0200
From: Tanya Brokhman <tlinder@...eaurora.org>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, dedekind1@...il.com
CC: linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] UBI: Fastmap: Make ubi_refill_pools() fair
Hi Richard,
On 11/24/2014 3:20 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Currently ubi_refill_pools() first fills the first and then
> the second one.
> If only very few free PEBs are available the second pool can get
> zero PEBs.
> Change ubi_refill_pools() to distribute free PEBs fair between
> all pools.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/ubi/wl.c | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/wl.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/wl.c
> index f028b68..c2822f7 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/wl.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/wl.c
> @@ -583,59 +583,62 @@ static void return_unused_pool_pebs(struct ubi_device *ubi,
> }
>
> /**
> - * refill_wl_pool - refills all the fastmap pool used by the
> - * WL sub-system.
> + * ubi_refill_pools - refills all fastmap PEB pools.
> * @ubi: UBI device description object
> */
> -static void refill_wl_pool(struct ubi_device *ubi)
> +void ubi_refill_pools(struct ubi_device *ubi)
> {
> + struct ubi_fm_pool *wl_pool = &ubi->fm_wl_pool;
> + struct ubi_fm_pool *pool = &ubi->fm_pool;
> struct ubi_wl_entry *e;
> - struct ubi_fm_pool *pool = &ubi->fm_wl_pool;
> + int enough;
>
> + spin_lock(&ubi->wl_lock);
> +
> + return_unused_pool_pebs(ubi, wl_pool);
> return_unused_pool_pebs(ubi, pool);
>
> - for (pool->size = 0; pool->size < pool->max_size; pool->size++) {
> - if (!ubi->free.rb_node ||
> - (ubi->free_count - ubi->beb_rsvd_pebs < 5))
> - break;
> + wl_pool->size = 0;
> + pool->size = 0;
>
> - e = find_wl_entry(ubi, &ubi->free, WL_FREE_MAX_DIFF);
> - self_check_in_wl_tree(ubi, e, &ubi->free);
> - rb_erase(&e->u.rb, &ubi->free);
> - ubi->free_count--;
> + for (;;) {
You loop for max(pool->max_size, wl_pool->max_size) itterations. IMO,
the code will be more clear if you use for(i=0; i<max(pool->max_size,
wl_pool->max_size); i++) instead of "int enough".
This is just coding style preference of course. I personally don't like
for(;;) that much.... Just a suggestion. :)
> + enough = 0;
> + if (pool->size < pool->max_size) {
> + if (!ubi->free.rb_node ||
> + (ubi->free_count - ubi->beb_rsvd_pebs < 5))
> + break;
>
> - pool->pebs[pool->size] = e->pnum;
> - }
> - pool->used = 0;
> -}
> + e = wl_get_wle(ubi);
> + if (!e)
> + break;
>
> -/**
> - * refill_wl_user_pool - refills all the fastmap pool used by ubi_wl_get_peb.
> - * @ubi: UBI device description object
> - */
> -static void refill_wl_user_pool(struct ubi_device *ubi)
> -{
> - struct ubi_fm_pool *pool = &ubi->fm_pool;
> + pool->pebs[pool->size] = e->pnum;
> + pool->size++;
> + } else
> + enough++;
>
> - return_unused_pool_pebs(ubi, pool);
> + if (wl_pool->size < wl_pool->max_size) {
> + if (!ubi->free.rb_node ||
> + (ubi->free_count - ubi->beb_rsvd_pebs < 5))
> + break;
>
> - for (pool->size = 0; pool->size < pool->max_size; pool->size++) {
> - pool->pebs[pool->size] = __wl_get_peb(ubi);
> - if (pool->pebs[pool->size] < 0)
> + e = find_wl_entry(ubi, &ubi->free, WL_FREE_MAX_DIFF);
> + self_check_in_wl_tree(ubi, e, &ubi->free);
> + rb_erase(&e->u.rb, &ubi->free);
> + ubi->free_count--;
why don't you use wl_get_peb() here?
Other then that - I agree with the patch. So if you want to keep it as
is, I'll add Reviewed-by.
> +
> + wl_pool->pebs[wl_pool->size] = e->pnum;
> + wl_pool->size++;
> + } else
> + enough++;
> +
> + if (enough == 2)
> break;
> }
> +
> + wl_pool->used = 0;
> pool->used = 0;
> -}
>
> -/**
> - * ubi_refill_pools - refills all fastmap PEB pools.
> - * @ubi: UBI device description object
> - */
> -void ubi_refill_pools(struct ubi_device *ubi)
> -{
> - spin_lock(&ubi->wl_lock);
> - refill_wl_pool(ubi);
> - refill_wl_user_pool(ubi);
> spin_unlock(&ubi->wl_lock);
> }
>
>
Thanks,
Tanya Brokhman
--
Qualcomm Israel, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
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