On 9/8/22 3:16 AM, Filipe Manana wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 1:26 AM Stefan Roesch <shr@xxxxxx> wrote: >> >> This replaces the call to function balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited() in >> the function btrfs_buffered_write() with a call to >> balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited_flags(). >> >> It also moves the function after the again label. This can cause the >> function to be called a bit later, but this should have no impact in the >> real world. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Roesch <shr@xxxxxx> >> --- >> fs/btrfs/file.c | 7 +++++-- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c >> index 6e191e353b22..fd42ba9de7a7 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c >> @@ -1654,6 +1654,7 @@ static noinline ssize_t btrfs_buffered_write(struct kiocb *iocb, >> loff_t old_isize = i_size_read(inode); >> unsigned int ilock_flags = 0; >> bool nowait = iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_NOWAIT; >> + unsigned int bdp_flags = nowait ? BDP_ASYNC : 0; >> >> if (nowait) >> ilock_flags |= BTRFS_ILOCK_TRY; >> @@ -1756,6 +1757,10 @@ static noinline ssize_t btrfs_buffered_write(struct kiocb *iocb, >> >> release_bytes = reserve_bytes; >> again: >> + ret = balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited_flags(inode->i_mapping, bdp_flags); >> + if (unlikely(ret)) > > We normally only use likely or unlikely in contextes where we observe > that it makes a significant difference. > What's the motivation here, have you verified that in this case it has > a significant impact? > I removed it. > Thanks. > >> + break; >> + >> /* >> * This is going to setup the pages array with the number of >> * pages we want, so we don't really need to worry about the >> @@ -1860,8 +1865,6 @@ static noinline ssize_t btrfs_buffered_write(struct kiocb *iocb, >> >> cond_resched(); >> >> - balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited(inode->i_mapping); >> - >> pos += copied; >> num_written += copied; >> } >> -- >> 2.30.2 >>
