On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 16:52 -0400, Fred Isaman wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Myklebust, Trond
> <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 14:47 -0400, Fred Isaman wrote:
> >> The coalesce code made assumptions that will no longer be true once
> >> non-page aligned io occurs. This introduces no change in
> >> current behavior, but allows for more general situations to come.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Fred Isaman <iisaman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> fs/nfs/nfs4filelayout.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> >> fs/nfs/pagelist.c | 2 +-
> >> fs/nfs/pnfs.c | 8 ++++++++
> >> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/fs/nfs/pagelist.c b/fs/nfs/pagelist.c
> >> index 5d01a16..b344946 100644
> >> --- a/fs/nfs/pagelist.c
> >> +++ b/fs/nfs/pagelist.c
> >> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static bool nfs_can_coalesce_requests(struct nfs_page *prev,
> >> return false;
> >> if (req->wb_context->state != prev->wb_context->state)
> >> return false;
> >> - if (req->wb_index != (prev->wb_index + 1))
> >> + if (req_offset(req) != req_offset(prev) + prev->wb_bytes)
> >
> > Can we micro-optimise this just a teensy bit by moving it until after
> > the req->wb_base and prev->wb_base tests? Since those are
> > computationally simpler, doing them first might make the "can't
> > coalesce" test a little faster.
> >
>
> Sure. Do you want a new v4 submission with just that change?
Just resend that 1 patch. I don't think we'll have any conflicts with
the rest.
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer
NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx
www.netapp.com
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��w��� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
