Hi,
I found some redundant code in your patch.
I think that locate_dirty_segment(sbi, old_cursegno) equals to
locate_dirty_segment(sbi, GET_SEGNO(sbi, new)) in refresh_sit_entry.
Because *new_blkaddr is a block belonging to old_cursegno.
How do you think?
On 화, 2014-01-28 at 14:54 +0900, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> This patch cleans up the refresh_sit_entry to handle locate_dirty_segments.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 1 +
> fs/f2fs/segment.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> index 42903c3..6e9515d 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> @@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ void destroy_node_manager_caches(void);
> void f2fs_balance_fs(struct f2fs_sb_info *);
> void f2fs_balance_fs_bg(struct f2fs_sb_info *);
> void invalidate_blocks(struct f2fs_sb_info *, block_t);
> +void refresh_sit_entry(struct f2fs_sb_info *, block_t, block_t);
> void clear_prefree_segments(struct f2fs_sb_info *);
> int npages_for_summary_flush(struct f2fs_sb_info *);
> void allocate_new_segments(struct f2fs_sb_info *);
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> index 7caac5f..89aa503 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> @@ -434,12 +434,14 @@ static void update_sit_entry(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, block_t blkaddr, int del)
> get_sec_entry(sbi, segno)->valid_blocks += del;
> }
>
> -static void refresh_sit_entry(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> - block_t old_blkaddr, block_t new_blkaddr)
> +void refresh_sit_entry(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, block_t old, block_t new)
> {
> - update_sit_entry(sbi, new_blkaddr, 1);
> - if (GET_SEGNO(sbi, old_blkaddr) != NULL_SEGNO)
> - update_sit_entry(sbi, old_blkaddr, -1);
> + update_sit_entry(sbi, new, 1);
> + if (GET_SEGNO(sbi, old) != NULL_SEGNO)
> + update_sit_entry(sbi, old, -1);
> +
> + locate_dirty_segment(sbi, GET_SEGNO(sbi, old));
> + locate_dirty_segment(sbi, GET_SEGNO(sbi, new));
> }
>
> void invalidate_blocks(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, block_t addr)
> @@ -886,12 +888,11 @@ void allocate_data_block(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct page *page,
> * since SSR needs latest valid block information.
> */
> refresh_sit_entry(sbi, old_blkaddr, *new_blkaddr);
> + locate_dirty_segment(sbi, old_cursegno);
>
> if (!__has_curseg_space(sbi, type))
> sit_i->s_ops->allocate_segment(sbi, type, false);
>
> - locate_dirty_segment(sbi, old_cursegno);
> - locate_dirty_segment(sbi, GET_SEGNO(sbi, old_blkaddr));
> mutex_unlock(&sit_i->sentry_lock);
>
> if (page && IS_NODESEG(type))
> @@ -992,9 +993,7 @@ void recover_data_page(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> __add_sum_entry(sbi, type, sum);
>
> refresh_sit_entry(sbi, old_blkaddr, new_blkaddr);
> -
> locate_dirty_segment(sbi, old_cursegno);
> - locate_dirty_segment(sbi, GET_SEGNO(sbi, old_blkaddr));
>
> mutex_unlock(&sit_i->sentry_lock);
> mutex_unlock(&curseg->curseg_mutex);
> @@ -1045,9 +1044,7 @@ void rewrite_node_page(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> f2fs_submit_page_mbio(sbi, page, new_blkaddr, &fio);
> f2fs_submit_merged_bio(sbi, NODE, WRITE);
> refresh_sit_entry(sbi, old_blkaddr, new_blkaddr);
> -
> locate_dirty_segment(sbi, old_cursegno);
> - locate_dirty_segment(sbi, GET_SEGNO(sbi, old_blkaddr));
>
> mutex_unlock(&sit_i->sentry_lock);
> mutex_unlock(&curseg->curseg_mutex);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
