On 13.03.19 г. 17:46 ч., David Sterba wrote:
> The series moves several atomic counters under CONFIG_BTRFS_DEBUG. The
> selected counters are not essential for the extent buffer locking to
> work. There's some space saving (4x 4B at least) and the cachelines are
> less stressed on non-debugging builds.
>
> The final size is 264 from 280, getting to 256 would be nice but hard or
> making the code unreadable. I have ideas to shave 7 more bytes but
> that's for another patchset.
>
> David Sterba (9):
> btrfs: add assertion helpers for spinning writers
> btrfs: use assertion helpers for spinning writers
> btrfs: add assertion helpers for spinning readers
> btrfs: use assertion helpers for spinning readers
> btrfs: add assertion helpers for extent buffer read lock counters
> btrfs: use assertion helpers for extent buffer read lock counters
> btrfs: add assertion helpers for extent buffer write lock counters
> btrfs: use assertion helpers for extent buffer write lock counters
> btrfs: switch extent_buffer::lock_nested to bool
>
> fs/btrfs/extent_io.c | 13 +++--
> fs/btrfs/extent_io.h | 11 ++--
> fs/btrfs/locking.c | 133 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 3 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
Overall the series looks good, one thing I wonder is wouldn't it be
better if you convert those WARN_ON to assert so that we fail fast in
case the locking invariant are broken?
In any case:
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <[email protected]>
>
