This maybe a problem, I try to update it in the next version, thank you.
Ritesh Harjani wrote on 2020/8/13 22:04:
>
>
> On 8/7/20 7:31 PM, brookxu wrote:
>> Fix log printing of ext4_mb_regular_allocator()，it may be an
>> unintentional behavior.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chunguang Xu <brookxu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 3 +--
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
>> index 5d4a1be..b0da525 100644
>> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
>> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
>> @@ -2324,15 +2324,14 @@ static int ext4_mb_good_group_nolock(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
>> * We've been searching too long. Let's try to allocate
>> * the best chunk we've found so far
>> */
>> -
>> ext4_mb_try_best_found(ac, &e4b);
>> if (ac->ac_status != AC_STATUS_FOUND) {
>> /*
>> * Someone more lucky has already allocated it.
>> * The only thing we can do is just take first
>> * found block(s)
>> - printk(KERN_DEBUG "EXT4-fs: someone won our chunk\n");
>> */
>> + mb_debug(sb, "EXT4-fs: someone won our chunk\n");
>
> mb_debug() already adds "EXT4-fs" string. So we need not add that here.
> but maybe we can add "sbi->s_mb_lost_chunks" in this msg, which may be
> helpful debug msg if too many lost chunks.
>
>
>> ac->ac_b_ex.fe_group = 0;
>> ac->ac_b_ex.fe_start = 0;
>> ac->ac_b_ex.fe_len = 0;
>>
