On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 08:49:00AM +0000, Naohiro Aota wrote: > On 2019/06/18 7:29, David Sterba wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 10:10:13PM +0900, Naohiro Aota wrote: > >> + u64 unusable; > > > > 'unusable' is specific to the zones, so 'zone_unusable' would make it > > clear. The terminilogy around space is confusing already (we have > > unused, free, reserved, allocated, slack). > > Sure. I will change the name. > > Or, is it better toadd new struct "btrfs_seq_alloc_info" and move all > these variable there? Then, I can just add one pointer to the struct here. There are 4 new members, but the block group structure is large already (528 bytes) so adding a few more will not make the allocations worse. There are also holes or inefficient types used so the size can be squeezed a bit, but this is unrelated to this patchset.
