Use correct criteria name instead stale integer number in comment
Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <[email protected]>
---
fs/ext4/ext4.h | 9 ++++++---
fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 14 ++++++++------
fs/ext4/mballoc.h | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
index 023571f8dd1b..9bd3764d1121 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h
+++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
@@ -213,11 +213,14 @@ enum criteria {
#define EXT4_MB_USE_RESERVED 0x2000
/* Do strict check for free blocks while retrying block allocation */
#define EXT4_MB_STRICT_CHECK 0x4000
-/* Large fragment size list lookup succeeded at least once for cr = 0 */
+/* Large fragment size list lookup succeeded at least once for
+ * CR_POWER2_ALIGNED */
#define EXT4_MB_CR_POWER2_ALIGNED_OPTIMIZED 0x8000
-/* Avg fragment size rb tree lookup succeeded at least once for cr = 1 */
+/* Avg fragment size rb tree lookup succeeded at least once for
+ * CR_GOAL_LEN_FAST */
#define EXT4_MB_CR_GOAL_LEN_FAST_OPTIMIZED 0x00010000
-/* Avg fragment size rb tree lookup succeeded at least once for cr = 1.5 */
+/* Avg fragment size rb tree lookup succeeded at least once for
+ * CR_BEST_AVAIL_LEN */
#define EXT4_MB_CR_BEST_AVAIL_LEN_OPTIMIZED 0x00020000
struct ext4_allocation_request {
diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index 5acf413808a2..71b2f9a18875 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -1131,8 +1131,9 @@ static void ext4_mb_choose_next_group(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
ext4_mb_choose_next_group_best_avail(ac, new_cr, group);
} else {
/*
- * TODO: For CR=2, we can arrange groups in an rb tree sorted by
- * bb_free. But until that happens, we should never come here.
+ * TODO: For CR=CR_GOAL_LEN_SLOW, we can arrange groups in an
+ * rb tree sorted by bb_free. But until that happens, we should
+ * never come here.
*/
WARN_ON(1);
}
@@ -3445,10 +3446,11 @@ static int ext4_mb_init_backend(struct super_block *sb)
}
if (sbi->s_mb_prefetch > ext4_get_groups_count(sb))
sbi->s_mb_prefetch = ext4_get_groups_count(sb);
- /* now many real IOs to prefetch within a single allocation at cr=0
- * given cr=0 is an CPU-related optimization we shouldn't try to
- * load too many groups, at some point we should start to use what
- * we've got in memory.
+ /*
+ * now many real IOs to prefetch within a single allocation at
+ * cr=CR_POWER2_ALIGNED. Given cr=CR_POWER2_ALIGNED is an CPU-related
+ * optimization we shouldn't try to load too many groups, at some point
+ * we should start to use what we've got in memory.
* with an average random access time 5ms, it'd take a second to get
* 200 groups (* N with flex_bg), so let's make this limit 4
*/
diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.h b/fs/ext4/mballoc.h
index 56938532b4ce..042437d8860f 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.h
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.h
@@ -187,8 +187,8 @@ struct ext4_allocation_context {
struct ext4_free_extent ac_f_ex;
/*
- * goal len can change in CR1.5, so save the original len. This is
- * used while adjusting the PA window and for accounting.
+ * goal len can change in CR_BEST_AVAIL_LEN, so save the original len.
+ * This is used while adjusting the PA window and for accounting.
*/
ext4_grpblk_t ac_orig_goal_len;
--
2.30.0
On Tue 23-04-24 20:40:45, Kemeng Shi wrote:
> Use correct criteria name instead stale integer number in comment
>
> Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <[email protected]>
You have cleaned up the superfluous "CR=" bits in several places but still
left them is couple more :). See below:
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> index 5acf413808a2..71b2f9a18875 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> @@ -1131,8 +1131,9 @@ static void ext4_mb_choose_next_group(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
> ext4_mb_choose_next_group_best_avail(ac, new_cr, group);
> } else {
> /*
> - * TODO: For CR=2, we can arrange groups in an rb tree sorted by
> - * bb_free. But until that happens, we should never come here.
> + * TODO: For CR=CR_GOAL_LEN_SLOW, we can arrange groups in an
^^^ Still you have left these superfluous
"CR=" bits here.
> + * rb tree sorted by bb_free. But until that happens, we should
> + * never come here.
> */
> WARN_ON(1);
> }
> @@ -3445,10 +3446,11 @@ static int ext4_mb_init_backend(struct super_block *sb)
> }
> if (sbi->s_mb_prefetch > ext4_get_groups_count(sb))
> sbi->s_mb_prefetch = ext4_get_groups_count(sb);
> - /* now many real IOs to prefetch within a single allocation at cr=0
> - * given cr=0 is an CPU-related optimization we shouldn't try to
> - * load too many groups, at some point we should start to use what
> - * we've got in memory.
> + /*
> + * now many real IOs to prefetch within a single allocation at
> + * cr=CR_POWER2_ALIGNED. Given cr=CR_POWER2_ALIGNED is an CPU-related
^^^ and here ^^^
> + * optimization we shouldn't try to load too many groups, at some point
> + * we should start to use what we've got in memory.
> * with an average random access time 5ms, it'd take a second to get
> * 200 groups (* N with flex_bg), so let's make this limit 4
> */
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR
on 4/24/2024 5:43 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 23-04-24 20:40:45, Kemeng Shi wrote:
>> Use correct criteria name instead stale integer number in comment
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <[email protected]>
>> Reviewed-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <[email protected]>
>
> You have cleaned up the superfluous "CR=" bits in several places but still
> left them is couple more :). See below:
Sorry, It seems that I mis-understand what you mean in last reply. I will
clean up all unnecessary stuff like "CR=" in next version. Thanks for the
feedback.
Kemeng
>
>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
>> index 5acf413808a2..71b2f9a18875 100644
>> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
>> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
>> @@ -1131,8 +1131,9 @@ static void ext4_mb_choose_next_group(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
>> ext4_mb_choose_next_group_best_avail(ac, new_cr, group);
>> } else {
>> /*
>> - * TODO: For CR=2, we can arrange groups in an rb tree sorted by
>> - * bb_free. But until that happens, we should never come here.
>> + * TODO: For CR=CR_GOAL_LEN_SLOW, we can arrange groups in an
> ^^^ Still you have left these superfluous
> "CR=" bits here.
>
>> + * rb tree sorted by bb_free. But until that happens, we should
>> + * never come here.
>> */
>> WARN_ON(1);
>> }
>> @@ -3445,10 +3446,11 @@ static int ext4_mb_init_backend(struct super_block *sb)
>> }
>> if (sbi->s_mb_prefetch > ext4_get_groups_count(sb))
>> sbi->s_mb_prefetch = ext4_get_groups_count(sb);
>> - /* now many real IOs to prefetch within a single allocation at cr=0
>> - * given cr=0 is an CPU-related optimization we shouldn't try to
>> - * load too many groups, at some point we should start to use what
>> - * we've got in memory.
>> + /*
>> + * now many real IOs to prefetch within a single allocation at
>> + * cr=CR_POWER2_ALIGNED. Given cr=CR_POWER2_ALIGNED is an CPU-related
> ^^^ and here ^^^
>
>> + * optimization we shouldn't try to load too many groups, at some point
>> + * we should start to use what we've got in memory.
>> * with an average random access time 5ms, it'd take a second to get
>> * 200 groups (* N with flex_bg), so let's make this limit 4
>> */
>
> Honza
>