提交 950575c0 编写于 作者: J Josef Bacik 提交者: David Sterba

btrfs: only use ->max_extent_size if it is set in the bitmap

While adding self tests for my space index change I was hitting a
problem where the space indexed tree wasn't returning the expected
->max_extent_size.  This is because we will skip searching any entry
that doesn't have ->bytes >= the amount of bytes we want.  However we'll
still set the max_extent_size based on that entry.  The problem is if we
don't search the bitmap we won't have ->max_extent_size set properly, so
we can't really trust it.

This doesn't really result in a problem per-se, it can just result in us
not finding contiguous area that may exist.  Fix the max_extent_size
helper to return ->bytes if ->max_extent_size isn't set, and add a big
comment explaining why we're doing this.
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
上级 83f1b680
......@@ -1870,9 +1870,33 @@ static int search_bitmap(struct btrfs_free_space_ctl *ctl,
return -1;
}
/*
* This is a little subtle. We *only* have ->max_extent_size set if we actually
* searched through the bitmap and figured out the largest ->max_extent_size,
* otherwise it's 0. In the case that it's 0 we don't want to tell the
* allocator the wrong thing, we want to use the actual real max_extent_size
* we've found already if it's larger, or we want to use ->bytes.
*
* This matters because find_free_space() will skip entries who's ->bytes is
* less than the required bytes. So if we didn't search down this bitmap, we
* may pick some previous entry that has a smaller ->max_extent_size than we
* have. For example, assume we have two entries, one that has
* ->max_extent_size set to 4k and ->bytes set to 1M. A second entry hasn't set
* ->max_extent_size yet, has ->bytes set to 8k and it's contiguous. We will
* call into find_free_space(), and return with max_extent_size == 4k, because
* that first bitmap entry had ->max_extent_size set, but the second one did
* not. If instead we returned 8k we'd come in searching for 8k, and find the
* 8k contiguous range.
*
* Consider the other case, we have 2 8k chunks in that second entry and still
* don't have ->max_extent_size set. We'll return 16k, and the next time the
* allocator comes in it'll fully search our second bitmap, and this time it'll
* get an uptodate value of 8k as the maximum chunk size. Then we'll get the
* right allocation the next loop through.
*/
static inline u64 get_max_extent_size(struct btrfs_free_space *entry)
{
if (entry->bitmap)
if (entry->bitmap && entry->max_extent_size)
return entry->max_extent_size;
return entry->bytes;
}
......
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册