Re: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: Optimise layout of btrfs_block_group_cache

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 06:30:34PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> 
> 
> On 26.06.2017 17:42, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> > With this patch applied pahole stats look like:
> > 
> > /* size: 840, cachelines: 14, members: 40 */
> > /* sum members: 833, holes: 1, sum holes: 7 */
> > /* bit holes: 1, sum bit holes: 28 bits */
> > /* last cacheline: 8 bytes */
> > 
> > No functional changes.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@xxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 14 +++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> > index cdd3775e930b..bdd06bbeb9aa 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> > @@ -586,6 +586,11 @@ struct btrfs_block_group_cache {
> >  	unsigned int iref:1;
> >  	unsigned int has_caching_ctl:1;
> >  	unsigned int removed:1;
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Does the block group need to be added to the free space tree?
> > +	 * Protected by free_space_lock.
> > +	 */
> > +	unsigned int needs_free_space:1;
> Upon closer inspection of memory-barriers.txt I'm not confident in this
> change. This puts fields protected by different locks in the same
> bitfield which can lead to corrupted values.

Alternatively, you can switch the flags to unsigned long and access them
using set_bit/test_bit, they're atomic regarding updates.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux