[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZLt/oJWa4MoE4F25@debian>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2023 15:05:04 +0800
From: Gao Xiang <xiang@...nel.org>
To: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] erofs: boost negative xattr lookup with bloom
filter
On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 06:49:23PM +0800, Jingbo Xu wrote:
> Optimise the negative xattr lookup with bloom filter.
>
> The bit value for the bloom filter map has a reverse semantics for
> compatibility. That is, the bit value of 0 indicates existence, while
> the bit value of 1 indicates the absence of corresponding xattr.
>
> The initial version is _only_ enabled when xattr_filter_reserved is
> zero. The filter map internals may change in the future, in which case
> the reserved flag will be set non-zero and we don't need bothering the
> compatible bits again at that time. For now disable the optimization if
> this reserved flag is non-zero.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> fs/erofs/Kconfig | 1 +
> fs/erofs/internal.h | 3 +++
> fs/erofs/super.c | 1 +
> fs/erofs/xattr.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/Kconfig b/fs/erofs/Kconfig
> index f259d92c9720..f49669def828 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/Kconfig
> +++ b/fs/erofs/Kconfig
> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ config EROFS_FS_DEBUG
> config EROFS_FS_XATTR
> bool "EROFS extended attributes"
> depends on EROFS_FS
> + select XXHASH
> default y
> help
> Extended attributes are name:value pairs associated with inodes by
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/internal.h b/fs/erofs/internal.h
> index 36e32fa542f0..3c1f89d8421b 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/internal.h
> +++ b/fs/erofs/internal.h
> @@ -151,6 +151,7 @@ struct erofs_sb_info {
> u32 xattr_prefix_start;
> u8 xattr_prefix_count;
> struct erofs_xattr_prefix_item *xattr_prefixes;
> + unsigned int xattr_filter_reserved;
> #endif
> u16 device_id_mask; /* valid bits of device id to be used */
>
> @@ -251,6 +252,7 @@ EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(fragments, incompat, INCOMPAT_FRAGMENTS)
> EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(dedupe, incompat, INCOMPAT_DEDUPE)
> EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(xattr_prefixes, incompat, INCOMPAT_XATTR_PREFIXES)
> EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(sb_chksum, compat, COMPAT_SB_CHKSUM)
> +EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(xattr_filter, compat, COMPAT_XATTR_FILTER)
>
> /* atomic flag definitions */
> #define EROFS_I_EA_INITED_BIT 0
> @@ -270,6 +272,7 @@ struct erofs_inode {
> unsigned char inode_isize;
> unsigned int xattr_isize;
>
> + unsigned int xattr_name_filter;
> unsigned int xattr_shared_count;
> unsigned int *xattr_shared_xattrs;
>
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/super.c b/fs/erofs/super.c
> index 9d6a3c6158bd..72122323300e 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/erofs/super.c
> @@ -388,6 +388,7 @@ static int erofs_read_superblock(struct super_block *sb)
> sbi->xattr_blkaddr = le32_to_cpu(dsb->xattr_blkaddr);
> sbi->xattr_prefix_start = le32_to_cpu(dsb->xattr_prefix_start);
> sbi->xattr_prefix_count = dsb->xattr_prefix_count;
> + sbi->xattr_filter_reserved = dsb->xattr_filter_reserved;
> #endif
> sbi->islotbits = ilog2(sizeof(struct erofs_inode_compact));
> sbi->root_nid = le16_to_cpu(dsb->root_nid);
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/xattr.c b/fs/erofs/xattr.c
> index 40178b6e0688..e9b9ed6b28d2 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/xattr.c
> +++ b/fs/erofs/xattr.c
> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
> * Copyright (C) 2021-2022, Alibaba Cloud
> */
> #include <linux/security.h>
> +#include <linux/xxhash.h>
> #include "xattr.h"
>
> struct erofs_xattr_iter {
> @@ -87,6 +88,7 @@ static int erofs_init_inode_xattrs(struct inode *inode)
> }
>
> ih = it.kaddr + erofs_blkoff(sb, it.pos);
> + vi->xattr_name_filter = le32_to_cpu(ih->h_name_filter);
> vi->xattr_shared_count = ih->h_shared_count;
> vi->xattr_shared_xattrs = kmalloc_array(vi->xattr_shared_count,
> sizeof(uint), GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -392,7 +394,10 @@ int erofs_getxattr(struct inode *inode, int index, const char *name,
> void *buffer, size_t buffer_size)
> {
> int ret;
> + uint32_t hashbit;
Why using `uint32_t` here rather than `unsigned int`? We don't use
`uint32_t` in the kernel codebase.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists