On Tue 23-04-24 20:40:45, Kemeng Shi wrote:
> Use correct criteria name instead stale integer number in comment
>
> Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
You have cleaned up the superfluous "CR=" bits in several places but still
left them is couple more :). See below:
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> index 5acf413808a2..71b2f9a18875 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> @@ -1131,8 +1131,9 @@ static void ext4_mb_choose_next_group(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
> ext4_mb_choose_next_group_best_avail(ac, new_cr, group);
> } else {
> /*
> - * TODO: For CR=2, we can arrange groups in an rb tree sorted by
> - * bb_free. But until that happens, we should never come here.
> + * TODO: For CR=CR_GOAL_LEN_SLOW, we can arrange groups in an
^^^ Still you have left these superfluous
"CR=" bits here.
> + * rb tree sorted by bb_free. But until that happens, we should
> + * never come here.
> */
> WARN_ON(1);
> }
> @@ -3445,10 +3446,11 @@ static int ext4_mb_init_backend(struct super_block *sb)
> }
> if (sbi->s_mb_prefetch > ext4_get_groups_count(sb))
> sbi->s_mb_prefetch = ext4_get_groups_count(sb);
> - /* now many real IOs to prefetch within a single allocation at cr=0
> - * given cr=0 is an CPU-related optimization we shouldn't try to
> - * load too many groups, at some point we should start to use what
> - * we've got in memory.
> + /*
> + * now many real IOs to prefetch within a single allocation at
> + * cr=CR_POWER2_ALIGNED. Given cr=CR_POWER2_ALIGNED is an CPU-related
^^^ and here ^^^
> + * optimization we shouldn't try to load too many groups, at some point
> + * we should start to use what we've got in memory.
> * with an average random access time 5ms, it'd take a second to get
> * 200 groups (* N with flex_bg), so let's make this limit 4
> */
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
