2022-03-31 02:44:30

by Sweet Tea Dorminy

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] btrfs: allocate page arrays more efficiently



On 3/30/22 12:58, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 12:44:05PM -0400, Sweet Tea Dorminy wrote:
>> In several places, btrfs allocates an array of pages, one at a time. In
>> addition to duplicating code, the mm subsystem provides a helper to
>> allocate multiple pages at once into an array which is suited for our
>> usecase. In the fast path, the batching can result in better allocation
>> decisions and less locking. This changeset first adjusts the users to
>> call a common array-of-pages allocation function, then adjusts that
>> common function to use the batch page allocator.
>>
>> v2: moved new helper to extent_io.[ch]. Fixed title format.
>
> It does not address comments from
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/[email protected]
I apologize, I completely missed the inline comments even though I
thought something was missing and reread it a couple times... v3 soon.


2022-03-31 21:22:08

by David Sterba

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] btrfs: allocate page arrays more efficiently

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 02:08:11PM -0400, Sweet Tea Dorminy wrote:
>
>
> On 3/30/22 12:58, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 12:44:05PM -0400, Sweet Tea Dorminy wrote:
> >> In several places, btrfs allocates an array of pages, one at a time. In
> >> addition to duplicating code, the mm subsystem provides a helper to
> >> allocate multiple pages at once into an array which is suited for our
> >> usecase. In the fast path, the batching can result in better allocation
> >> decisions and less locking. This changeset first adjusts the users to
> >> call a common array-of-pages allocation function, then adjusts that
> >> common function to use the batch page allocator.
> >>
> >> v2: moved new helper to extent_io.[ch]. Fixed title format.
> >
> > It does not address comments from
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/[email protected]
> I apologize, I completely missed the inline comments even though I
> thought something was missing and reread it a couple times... v3 soon.

Yeah it's common to not trim a patch and write comments right next to
the code, trimming to just a piece of code is also done if it's just the
one thing to comment, but for example I go through the patch several
times so trimming would not work very well.

If you're using mutt, there's a command (bound to T by default) that
hides any quoted text.