On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:43:46AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > static void
> > add_dotdot_update(
> > @@ -64,12 +65,14 @@ add_dotdot_update(
> > do_error(_("malloc failed add_dotdot_update (%zu bytes)\n"),
> > sizeof(dotdot_update_t));
> >
> > + pthread_mutex_lock(&dotdot_lock);
> > dir->next = dotdot_update_list;
> > dir->irec = irec;
> > dir->agno = agno;
> > dir->ino_offset = ino_offset;
> >
> > dotdot_update_list = dir;
> > + pthread_mutex_unlock(&dotdot_lock);
>
> Would be nice to make this use a list_head if you touch it anyway.
> (As a separate patch)
>
> > static void
> > traverse_ags(
> > - xfs_mount_t *mp)
> > + xfs_mount_t *mp)
>
> Not quite sure what actually changed here, but if you touch it anyway
> you might as well use the struct version..
Whitespace after xfs_mount_t, judging by the highlighting I see in
the editor right now.
> > + if (!ag_stride) {
> > + work_queue_t queue;
> > +
> > + queue.mp = mp;
> > + pf_args[0] = start_inode_prefetch(0, 1, NULL);
> > + for (i = 0; i < glob_agcount; i++) {
> > + pf_args[(~i) & 1] = start_inode_prefetch(i + 1, 1,
> > + pf_args[i & 1]);
> > + traverse_function(&queue, i, pf_args[i & 1]);
> > + }
> > + return;
> > }
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * create one worker thread for each segment of the volume
> > + */
> > + queues = malloc(thread_count * sizeof(work_queue_t));
> > + for (i = 0, agno = 0; i < thread_count; i++) {
> > + create_work_queue(&queues[i], mp, 1);
> > + pf_args[0] = NULL;
> > + for (j = 0; j < ag_stride && agno < glob_agcount; j++, agno++) {
> > + pf_args[0] = start_inode_prefetch(agno, 1, pf_args[0]);
> > + queue_work(&queues[i], traverse_function, agno,
> > + pf_args[0]);
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * wait for workers to complete
> > + */
> > + for (i = 0; i < thread_count; i++)
> > + destroy_work_queue(&queues[i]);
> > + free(queues);
>
>
> This is the third copy of this code block, might make sense to
> consolidate it.
Agreed, just haven't got to it.
> Btw, does anyone remember why we have the libxfs_bcache_overflowed()
> special case in phase4, but not anywhere else?
I recall something about memory consumption, but I doubt that code
can even trigger given that if we get to overflow conditions we
immediately double the cache size and so libxfs_bcache_overflowed()
will never see an overflow condition....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
