On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 04:16:04PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> From: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxx>
> @@ -4802,8 +4885,8 @@ struct extent_buffer *btrfs_clone_extent_buffer(struct extent_buffer *src)
> return new;
> }
>
> -struct extent_buffer *__alloc_dummy_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
> - u64 start, unsigned long len)
> +struct extent_buffer *alloc_dummy_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_eb_info *eb_info,
> + u64 start, unsigned long len)
The __alloc_dummy_extent_buffer takes the length parameter because it's
used in tests that need to pass different values.
I've removed nodesize from alloc_dummy_extent_buffer and the callchain
because we know that it's always going to be fs_info->nodesize.
Reintroducing it does not look like a good idea.
> {
> struct extent_buffer *eb;
> unsigned long num_pages;
> @@ -160,13 +162,25 @@ struct extent_state {
> #endif
> };
>
> +struct btrfs_eb_info {
> + struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info;
> + struct extent_io_tree io_tree;
> + struct extent_io_tree io_failure_tree;
> +
> + /* Extent buffer radix tree */
> + spinlock_t buffer_lock;
> + struct radix_tree_root buffer_radix;
> + struct list_lru lru_list;
> + pgoff_t writeback_index;
> +};
> +
> #define INLINE_EXTENT_BUFFER_PAGES 16
> #define MAX_INLINE_EXTENT_BUFFER_SIZE (INLINE_EXTENT_BUFFER_PAGES * PAGE_SIZE)
> struct extent_buffer {
> u64 start;
> unsigned long len;
> unsigned long bflags;
> - struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info;
> + struct btrfs_eb_info *eb_info;
This single change increases the patch size just because all the
callers need to be updated. I suggest to keep fs_info in extent_buffer,
we're not going to lose much in terms of memory:
currently there are 14 eb objects in a 4k slab page, with the additional
fs_info it's still 14,
280 * 14 = 3920, unused 176 bytes
288 * 14 = 4032, unused 64 bytes
> spinlock_t refs_lock;
> atomic_t refs;
> atomic_t io_pages;
