On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 06:54:08PM +0200, Pankaj Raghav wrote:
> Instead of calculating the superblock location every time, cache the
> superblock zone location in btrfs_zoned_device_info struct and use it to
> locate the zone index.
>
> The functions such as btrfs_sb_log_location_bdev() and
> btrfs_reset_sb_log_zones() which work directly on block_device shall
> continue to use the sb_zone_number because btrfs_zoned_device_info
> struct might not have been initialized at that point.
>
> This patch will enable non power-of-2 zoned devices to not perform
> division to lookup superblock and its mirror location.
>
> Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/zoned.c | 13 +++++++++----
> fs/btrfs/zoned.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/zoned.c b/fs/btrfs/zoned.c
> index 06f22c021..e8c7cebb2 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/zoned.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/zoned.c
> @@ -511,6 +511,11 @@ int btrfs_get_dev_zone_info(struct btrfs_device *device, bool populate_cache)
> max_active_zones - nactive);
> }
>
> + /* Cache the sb zone number */
> + for (i = 0; i < BTRFS_SUPER_MIRROR_MAX; ++i) {
> + zone_info->sb_zone_location[i] =
> + sb_zone_number(zone_info->zone_size_shift, i);
> + }
I don't think we need to cache the value right now, it's not in any hot
path and call to bdev_zone_no is relatively cheap (only dereferencing a
few pointers, all in-memory values).
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
