On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 09:32:38PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:46:23 +0530 "Amit K. Arora" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > + */
> > +int ext4_ext_try_to_merge(struct inode *inode,
> > + struct ext4_ext_path *path,
> > + struct ext4_extent *ex)
> > +{
> > + struct ext4_extent_header *eh;
> > + unsigned int depth, len;
> > + int merge_done=0, uninitialized = 0;
>
> space around "=", please.
>
> Many people prefer not to do the multiple-definitions-per-line, btw:
>
> int merge_done = 0;
> int uninitialized = 0;
Ok. Will make the change.
>
> reasons:
>
> - If gives you some space for a nice comment
>
> - It makes patches much more readable, and it makes rejects easier to fix
>
> - standardisation.
>
> > + depth = ext_depth(inode);
> > + BUG_ON(path[depth].p_hdr == NULL);
> > + eh = path[depth].p_hdr;
> > +
> > + while (ex < EXT_LAST_EXTENT(eh)) {
> > + if (!ext4_can_extents_be_merged(inode, ex, ex + 1))
> > + break;
> > + /* merge with next extent! */
> > + if (ext4_ext_is_uninitialized(ex))
> > + uninitialized = 1;
> > + ex->ee_len = cpu_to_le16(ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ex)
> > + + ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ex + 1));
> > + if (uninitialized)
> > + ext4_ext_mark_uninitialized(ex);
> > +
> > + if (ex + 1 < EXT_LAST_EXTENT(eh)) {
> > + len = (EXT_LAST_EXTENT(eh) - ex - 1)
> > + * sizeof(struct ext4_extent);
> > + memmove(ex + 1, ex + 2, len);
> > + }
> > + eh->eh_entries = cpu_to_le16(le16_to_cpu(eh->eh_entries)-1);
>
> Kenrel convention is to put spaces around "-"
Will fix this.
>
> > + merge_done = 1;
> > + BUG_ON(eh->eh_entries == 0);
>
> eek, scary BUG_ON. Do we really need to be that severe? Would it be
> better to warn and run ext4_error() here?
Ok.
>
> > + }
> > +
> > + return merge_done;
> > +}
> > +
> > +
> >
> > ...
> >
> > +/*
> > + * ext4_ext_convert_to_initialized:
> > + * this function is called by ext4_ext_get_blocks() if someone tries to
> > write
> > + * to an uninitialized extent. It may result in splitting the uninitialized
> > + * extent into multiple extents (upto three). Atleast one initialized
> > extent
> > + * and atmost two uninitialized extents can result.
>
> There are some typos here
>
> > + * There are three possibilities:
> > + * a> No split required: Entire extent should be initialized.
> > + * b> Split into two extents: Only one end of the extent is being
> > written to.
> > + * c> Split into three extents: Somone is writing in middle of the
> > extent.
>
> and here
>
Ok. Will fix them.
> > + */
> > +int ext4_ext_convert_to_initialized(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
> > + struct ext4_ext_path *path,
> > + ext4_fsblk_t iblock,
> > + unsigned long max_blocks)
> > +{
> > + struct ext4_extent *ex, *ex1 = NULL, *ex2 = NULL, *ex3 = NULL, newex;
> > + struct ext4_extent_header *eh;
> > + unsigned int allocated, ee_block, ee_len, depth;
> > + ext4_fsblk_t newblock;
> > + int err = 0, ret = 0;
> > +
> > + depth = ext_depth(inode);
> > + eh = path[depth].p_hdr;
> > + ex = path[depth].p_ext;
> > + ee_block = le32_to_cpu(ex->ee_block);
> > + ee_len = ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ex);
> > + allocated = ee_len - (iblock - ee_block);
> > + newblock = iblock - ee_block + ext_pblock(ex);
> > + ex2 = ex;
> > +
> > + /* ex1: ee_block to iblock - 1 : uninitialized */
> > + if (iblock > ee_block) {
> > + ex1 = ex;
> > + ex1->ee_len = cpu_to_le16(iblock - ee_block);
> > + ext4_ext_mark_uninitialized(ex1);
> > + ex2 = &newex;
> > + }
> > + /* for sanity, update the length of the ex2 extent before
> > + * we insert ex3, if ex1 is NULL. This is to avoid temporary
> > + * overlap of blocks.
> > + */
> > + if (!ex1 && allocated > max_blocks)
> > + ex2->ee_len = cpu_to_le16(max_blocks);
> > + /* ex3: to ee_block + ee_len : uninitialised */
> > + if (allocated > max_blocks) {
> > + unsigned int newdepth;
> > + ex3 = &newex;
> > + ex3->ee_block = cpu_to_le32(iblock + max_blocks);
> > + ext4_ext_store_pblock(ex3, newblock + max_blocks);
> > + ex3->ee_len = cpu_to_le16(allocated - max_blocks);
> > + ext4_ext_mark_uninitialized(ex3);
> > + err = ext4_ext_insert_extent(handle, inode, path, ex3);
> > + if (err)
> > + goto out;
> > + /* The depth, and hence eh & ex might change
> > + * as part of the insert above.
> > + */
> > + newdepth = ext_depth(inode);
> > + if (newdepth != depth)
> > + {
>
> Use
>
> if (newdepth != depth) {
Ok.
>
> > + depth=newdepth;
>
> spaces
Ok.
>
> > + path = ext4_ext_find_extent(inode, iblock, NULL);
> > + if (IS_ERR(path)) {
> > + err = PTR_ERR(path);
> > + path = NULL;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + eh = path[depth].p_hdr;
> > + ex = path[depth].p_ext;
> > + if (ex2 != &newex)
> > + ex2 = ex;
> > + }
> > + allocated = max_blocks;
> > + }
> > + /* If there was a change of depth as part of the
> > + * insertion of ex3 above, we need to update the length
> > + * of the ex1 extent again here
> > + */
> > + if (ex1 && ex1 != ex) {
> > + ex1 = ex;
> > + ex1->ee_len = cpu_to_le16(iblock - ee_block);
> > + ext4_ext_mark_uninitialized(ex1);
> > + ex2 = &newex;
> > + }
> > + /* ex2: iblock to iblock + maxblocks-1 : initialised */
> > + ex2->ee_block = cpu_to_le32(iblock);
> > + ex2->ee_start = cpu_to_le32(newblock);
> > + ext4_ext_store_pblock(ex2, newblock);
> > + ex2->ee_len = cpu_to_le16(allocated);
> > + if (ex2 != ex)
> > + goto insert;
> > + if ((err = ext4_ext_get_access(handle, inode, path + depth)))
> > + goto out;
>
> The preferred style is
>
> err = ext4_ext_get_access(handle, inode, path + depth);
> if (err)
> goto out;
Right. Will change it.
> > + /* New (initialized) extent starts from the first block
> > + * in the current extent. i.e., ex2 == ex
> > + * We have to see if it can be merged with the extent
> > + * on the left.
> > + */
> > + if (ex2 > EXT_FIRST_EXTENT(eh)) {
> > + /* To merge left, pass "ex2 - 1" to try_to_merge(),
> > + * since it merges towards right _only_.
> > + */
> > + ret = ext4_ext_try_to_merge(inode, path, ex2 - 1);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + err = ext4_ext_correct_indexes(handle, inode, path);
> > + if (err)
> > + goto out;
> > + depth = ext_depth(inode);
> > + ex2--;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + /* Try to Merge towards right. This might be required
> > + * only when the whole extent is being written to.
> > + * i.e. ex2==ex and ex3==NULL.
> > + */
> > + if (!ex3) {
> > + ret = ext4_ext_try_to_merge(inode, path, ex2);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + err = ext4_ext_correct_indexes(handle, inode, path);
> > + if (err)
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + /* Mark modified extent as dirty */
> > + err = ext4_ext_dirty(handle, inode, path + depth);
> > + goto out;
> > +insert:
> > + err = ext4_ext_insert_extent(handle, inode, path, &newex);
> > +out:
> > + return err ? err : allocated;
> > +}
>
> Sigh. I hope you guys know how all this works, because the extent code is
> a mystery to me. Is the on-disk layout and the allocation strategy
> described anywhere?
>
> > +extern int ext4_ext_try_to_merge(struct inode *, struct ext4_ext_path *,
> > struct ext4_extent *);
>
> Again, I do think that sticking the identifiers in there helps
> readability. Although it is not as important in a boring old declaration
> as it is in, say, inode_operations, etc.
>
> Please try to keep the code looking nice in an 80-column display.
Ok. Will make the required changes.
Thanks again for your comments!
--
Regards,
Amit Arora
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
