2024-05-31 09:31:23

by Zhiguo Niu

Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: use new ioprio Macro to get ckpt thread ioprio data

Use new Macro IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL to get ckpt thread ioprio data(level),
it is more accurate and consisten with the way setting ckpt thread
ioprio(IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(class, data)).

Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Niu <[email protected]>
---
fs/f2fs/sysfs.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
index 72676c5..55d46da 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
@@ -340,7 +340,7 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_sbi_show(struct f2fs_attr *a,
if (!strcmp(a->attr.name, "ckpt_thread_ioprio")) {
struct ckpt_req_control *cprc = &sbi->cprc_info;
int class = IOPRIO_PRIO_CLASS(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
- int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_DATA(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
+ int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);

if (class != IOPRIO_CLASS_RT && class != IOPRIO_CLASS_BE)
return -EINVAL;
--
1.9.1

2024-06-03 06:44:53

by Chao Yu

Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: use new ioprio Macro to get ckpt thread ioprio data

On 2024/5/31 17:10, Zhiguo Niu wrote:
> Use new Macro IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL to get ckpt thread ioprio data(level),
> it is more accurate and consisten with the way setting ckpt thread
> ioprio(IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(class, data)).
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Niu <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/sysfs.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> index 72676c5..55d46da 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> @@ -340,7 +340,7 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_sbi_show(struct f2fs_attr *a,
> if (!strcmp(a->attr.name, "ckpt_thread_ioprio")) {
> struct ckpt_req_control *cprc = &sbi->cprc_info;
> int class = IOPRIO_PRIO_CLASS(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
> - int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_DATA(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
> + int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);

So, can you please use 'level' to instead 'data' in f2fs_sbi_show() and
__sbi_store()?

Thanks,

>
> if (class != IOPRIO_CLASS_RT && class != IOPRIO_CLASS_BE)
> return -EINVAL;

2024-06-03 06:52:38

by Zhiguo Niu

Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: use new ioprio Macro to get ckpt thread ioprio data

On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 2:39 PM Chao Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 2024/5/31 17:10, Zhiguo Niu wrote:
> > Use new Macro IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL to get ckpt thread ioprio data(level),
> > it is more accurate and consisten with the way setting ckpt thread
> > ioprio(IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(class, data)).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Niu <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > fs/f2fs/sysfs.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> > index 72676c5..55d46da 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> > @@ -340,7 +340,7 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_sbi_show(struct f2fs_attr *a,
> > if (!strcmp(a->attr.name, "ckpt_thread_ioprio")) {
> > struct ckpt_req_control *cprc = &sbi->cprc_info;
> > int class = IOPRIO_PRIO_CLASS(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
> > - int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_DATA(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
> > + int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
>
> So, can you please use 'level' to instead 'data' in f2fs_sbi_show() and
> __sbi_store()?
Hi Chao,

IOPRIO_PRIO_DATA in the new kernel version includes two parts: level and hint.
In __sbi_store, " IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(class, data)" is used to set ckpt
iopriority,
and it will pass default hint value, we just need to keep class /level right.

#define IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(prioclass, priolevel) \
ioprio_value(prioclass, priolevel, IOPRIO_HINT_NONE)
so i think this part is not needed to modify.

thanks!
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > if (class != IOPRIO_CLASS_RT && class != IOPRIO_CLASS_BE)
> > return -EINVAL;
>

2024-06-03 07:50:15

by Chao Yu

Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: use new ioprio Macro to get ckpt thread ioprio data

On 2024/6/3 14:52, Zhiguo Niu wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 2:39 PM Chao Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 2024/5/31 17:10, Zhiguo Niu wrote:
>>> Use new Macro IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL to get ckpt thread ioprio data(level),
>>> it is more accurate and consisten with the way setting ckpt thread
>>> ioprio(IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(class, data)).
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Niu <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> fs/f2fs/sysfs.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
>>> index 72676c5..55d46da 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
>>> @@ -340,7 +340,7 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_sbi_show(struct f2fs_attr *a,
>>> if (!strcmp(a->attr.name, "ckpt_thread_ioprio")) {
>>> struct ckpt_req_control *cprc = &sbi->cprc_info;
>>> int class = IOPRIO_PRIO_CLASS(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
>>> - int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_DATA(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
>>> + int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
>>
>> So, can you please use 'level' to instead 'data' in f2fs_sbi_show() and
>> __sbi_store()?
> Hi Chao,
>
> IOPRIO_PRIO_DATA in the new kernel version includes two parts: level and hint.
> In __sbi_store, " IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(class, data)" is used to set ckpt
> iopriority,
> and it will pass default hint value, we just need to keep class /level right.

Zhiguo,

I think f2fs only support configuring priolevel rather than priolevel and
priohint of ckpt thread via ckpt_thread_ioprio sysfs interface, so it will
be more readable to use 'level' instead of 'data' in context of the interface,
thoughts?

Thanks,

>
> #define IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(prioclass, priolevel) \
> ioprio_value(prioclass, priolevel, IOPRIO_HINT_NONE)
> so i think this part is not needed to modify.
>
> thanks!
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>
>>> if (class != IOPRIO_CLASS_RT && class != IOPRIO_CLASS_BE)
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>

2024-06-03 08:15:13

by Zhiguo Niu

Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: use new ioprio Macro to get ckpt thread ioprio data

On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 3:50 PM Chao Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 2024/6/3 14:52, Zhiguo Niu wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 2:39 PM Chao Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2024/5/31 17:10, Zhiguo Niu wrote:
> >>> Use new Macro IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL to get ckpt thread ioprio data(level),
> >>> it is more accurate and consisten with the way setting ckpt thread
> >>> ioprio(IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(class, data)).
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Niu <[email protected]>
> >>> ---
> >>> fs/f2fs/sysfs.c | 2 +-
> >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> >>> index 72676c5..55d46da 100644
> >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> >>> @@ -340,7 +340,7 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_sbi_show(struct f2fs_attr *a,
> >>> if (!strcmp(a->attr.name, "ckpt_thread_ioprio")) {
> >>> struct ckpt_req_control *cprc = &sbi->cprc_info;
> >>> int class = IOPRIO_PRIO_CLASS(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
> >>> - int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_DATA(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
> >>> + int data = IOPRIO_PRIO_LEVEL(cprc->ckpt_thread_ioprio);
> >>
> >> So, can you please use 'level' to instead 'data' in f2fs_sbi_show() and
> >> __sbi_store()?
> > Hi Chao,
> >
> > IOPRIO_PRIO_DATA in the new kernel version includes two parts: level and hint.
> > In __sbi_store, " IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(class, data)" is used to set ckpt
> > iopriority,
> > and it will pass default hint value, we just need to keep class /level right.
>
> Zhiguo,
>
> I think f2fs only support configuring priolevel rather than priolevel and
> priohint of ckpt thread via ckpt_thread_ioprio sysfs interface, so it will
> be more readable to use 'level' instead of 'data' in context of the interface,
> thoughts?
Hi Chao,
I understand what you said and I agree with this. I will update it in
the next version.
Thanks!
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > #define IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(prioclass, priolevel) \
> > ioprio_value(prioclass, priolevel, IOPRIO_HINT_NONE)
> > so i think this part is not needed to modify.
> >
> > thanks!
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >>>
> >>> if (class != IOPRIO_CLASS_RT && class != IOPRIO_CLASS_BE)
> >>> return -EINVAL;
> >>