[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190830184606.GA175612@architecture4>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 02:46:06 +0800
From: Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@...wei.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, "Pavel Machek" <pavel@...x.de>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
"Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
"Dave Chinner" <david@...morbit.com>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org>, Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>,
Miao Xie <miaoxie@...wei.com>,
Li Guifu <bluce.liguifu@...wei.com>,
Fang Wei <fangwei1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 05/24] erofs: add inode operations
Hi Christoph,
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 09:42:05AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 07:59:22PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 03:24:26AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > []
> >
> > >
> > > > +
> > > > + /* fill last page if inline data is available */
> > > > + err = fill_inline_data(inode, data, ofs);
> > >
> > > Well, I think you should move the is_inode_flat_inline and
> > > (S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode) && inode->i_size < PAGE_SIZE) checks from that
> > > helper here, as otherwise you make everyone wonder why you'd always
> > > fill out the inline data.
> >
> > Currently, fill_inline_data() only fills for fast symlink,
> > later we can fill any tail-end block (such as dir block)
> > for our requirements.
>
> So change it when that later changes actually come in. And even then
> having the checks outside the function is a lot more obvious.
Okay.
>
> > And I think that is minor.
>
> The problem is that each of these issues might appear minor on their
> own. But combined a lot of the coding style choices lead to code that
> is more suitable an obsfucated code contest than the Linux kernel as
> trying to understand even just a few places requires jumping through
> tons of helpers with misleading names and spread over various files.
>
> > The consideration is simply because iget_locked performs better
> > than iget5_locked.
>
> In what benchmark do the differences show up?
In a word, no benchmark here, just because
"unsigned long on 32-bit platforms is 4 bytes."
but erofs nid is a 64-bit number.
iget_locked will do find_inode_fast (no callback at all)
rather than iget5_locked --> find_inode (test callback) ->
inode_insert5(set callback) for each new inode.
For most 64-bit platforms, iget_locked is enough,
32-bit platforms become rare...
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists