On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 21:44:19 +0300
Dmitrii Tcvetkov <demfloro@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > +/**
> > + * guess_optimal - return guessed optimal mirror
> > + *
> > + * Optimal expected to be pid % num_stripes
> > + *
> > + * That's generaly ok for spread load
> > + * Add some balancer based on queue leght to device
> > + *
> > + * Basic ideas:
> > + * - Sequential read generate low amount of request
> > + * so if load of drives are equal, use pid % num_stripes
> > balancing
> > + * - For mixed rotate/non-rotate mirrors, pick non-rotate as
> > optimal
> > + * and repick if other dev have "significant" less queue lenght
> > + * - Repick optimal if queue leght of other mirror are less
> > + */
> > +static int guess_optimal(struct map_lookup *map, int optimal)
> > +{
> > + int i;
> > + int round_down = 8;
> > + int num = map->num_stripes;
>
> num has to be initialized from map->sub_stripes if we're reading
> RAID10, otherwise there will be NULL pointer dereference
>
Check can be like:
if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10)
num = map->sub_stripes;
>@@ -5804,10 +5914,12 @@ static int __btrfs_map_block(struct
>btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
> stripe_index += mirror_num - 1;
> else {
> int old_stripe_index = stripe_index;
>+ optimal = guess_optimal(map,
>+ current->pid %
>map->num_stripes);
> stripe_index = find_live_mirror(fs_info, map,
> stripe_index,
> map->sub_stripes,
> stripe_index +
>- current->pid %
>map->sub_stripes,
>+ optimal,
> dev_replace_is_ongoing);
> mirror_num = stripe_index - old_stripe_index
> + 1; }
>--
>2.15.1
Also here calculation should be with map->sub_stripes too.
--
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
