linux-kernel - RE: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 12/12] f2fs: use extent

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <COL402-EAS385C99A3E59C61CC6871C57AB970@phx.gbl>
Date:	Thu, 2 Jul 2015 20:36:16 +0800
From:	Chao Yu <yuchaochina@...mail.com>
To:	"'Jaegeuk Kim'" <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
CC:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 12/12] f2fs: use extent_cache by default

Hi Jaegeuk,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaegeuk@...nel.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 2:40 AM
> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
> Cc: Jaegeuk Kim
> Subject: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 12/12] f2fs: use extent_cache by default
> 
> We don't need to handle the duplicate extent infot showrmation.

information?

> 
> The integrated rule is:
>  - update on-disk extent with largest one tracked by in-memory extent_cache
>  - destroy extent_tree for the truncation case
>  - drop per-inode extent_cache by shrinker
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>

[snip]

> @@ -538,7 +427,11 @@ static struct extent_node *__insert_extent_tree(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>  		}
>  	}
> 
> -	return __attach_extent_node(sbi, et, ei, parent, p);
> +	en = __attach_extent_node(sbi, et, ei, parent, p);
> +update_out:
> +	if (en && en->ei.len > et->largest.len)
> +		et->largest = en->ei;

IMO, it's better to update cached_en here if it is invalid in
__detach_extent_node, then cached_en and largest may point different
extent info, it can expand our region of first level extent cache.

[snip]

> +
> +	/* free all extent info belong to this extent tree */
> +	f2fs_destroy_extent_node(inode);

How about returning number of freed extent node for tracing.

node_cnt = f2fs_destroy_extent_node(inode);

[snip]

> @@ -237,10 +237,11 @@ void update_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
>  	ri->i_size = cpu_to_le64(i_size_read(inode));
>  	ri->i_blocks = cpu_to_le64(inode->i_blocks);
> 
> -	read_lock(&F2FS_I(inode)->ext_lock);
> -	set_raw_extent(&F2FS_I(inode)->ext, &ri->i_ext);
> -	read_unlock(&F2FS_I(inode)->ext_lock);
> -
> +	if (F2FS_I(inode)->extent_tree)

Could extent cache destroy after above check?

Thanks,
--
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/