| Message ID | 1438235311-23788-15-git-send-email-yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Am 30.07.2015 um 07:48 schrieb Dongsheng Yang: > Currently, budget subsystem in ubifs are working on budgeting > page-by-page. But sometimes we want to budget a space for one > block, e.g for quota file writing. So this commit extend budget > subsystem to support blocks budgeting and releasing. > > Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang <yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > fs/ubifs/budget.c | 4 ++++ > fs/ubifs/debug.c | 2 ++ > fs/ubifs/super.c | 1 + > fs/ubifs/ubifs.h | 5 +++++ > 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/budget.c b/fs/ubifs/budget.c > index 11a11b3..ba4e530 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/budget.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/budget.c > @@ -397,6 +397,8 @@ static int calc_data_growth(const struct ubifs_info *c, > data_growth += c->bi.page_budget; > if (req->new_dent) > data_growth += c->bi.dent_budget; > + if (req->new_block_num) > + data_growth += c->bi.block_budget * req->new_block_num; > data_growth += req->new_ino_d; > return data_growth; > } > @@ -418,6 +420,8 @@ static int calc_dd_growth(const struct ubifs_info *c, > dd_growth += c->bi.inode_budget << (req->dirtied_ino - 1); > if (req->mod_dent) > dd_growth += c->bi.dent_budget; > + if (req->dirtied_block_num) > + dd_growth += c->bi.block_budget * req->dirtied_block_num; > dd_growth += req->dirtied_ino_d; > return dd_growth; > } > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/debug.c b/fs/ubifs/debug.c > index 4c46a98..cafd592 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/debug.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/debug.c > @@ -556,6 +556,8 @@ void ubifs_dump_budget_req(const struct ubifs_budget_req *req) > req->new_page, req->dirtied_page); > pr_err("\tnew_dent %d, mod_dent %d\n", > req->new_dent, req->mod_dent); > + pr_err("\tnew_block %d, dirtied_block %d\n", > + req->new_block_num, req->dirtied_block_num); > pr_err("\tidx_growth %d\n", req->idx_growth); > pr_err("\tdata_growth %d dd_growth %d\n", > req->data_growth, req->dd_growth); > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/super.c b/fs/ubifs/super.c > index c643261..eb04e42 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/super.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/super.c > @@ -698,6 +698,7 @@ static int init_constants_sb(struct ubifs_info *c) > c->bi.page_budget = UBIFS_MAX_DATA_NODE_SZ * UBIFS_BLOCKS_PER_PAGE; > c->bi.inode_budget = UBIFS_INO_NODE_SZ; > c->bi.dent_budget = UBIFS_MAX_DENT_NODE_SZ; > + c->bi.block_budget = UBIFS_MAX_DATA_NODE_SZ; > > /* > * When the amount of flash space used by buds becomes > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h b/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h > index 3b5e932..71b79b5 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h > +++ b/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h > @@ -861,6 +861,8 @@ struct ubifs_compressor { > * @new_ino_d: how much data newly created inode contains > * @dirtied_ino: how many inodes the operation makes dirty > * @dirtied_ino_d: how much data dirtied inode contains > + * @new_block_num: how many new blocks > + * @dirtied_block_num: how many dirtied blocks What are the semantics of these new fields? e.g. is it allowed to set both new_block_num and new_dent? > * @idx_growth: how much the index will supposedly grow > * @data_growth: how much new data the operation will supposedly add > * @dd_growth: how much data that makes other data dirty the operation will > @@ -902,6 +904,8 @@ struct ubifs_budget_req { > unsigned int dirtied_ino; > unsigned int dirtied_ino_d; > #endif > + unsigned int new_block_num; > + unsigned int dirtied_block_num; Why are these not under UBIFS_DEBUG? I like the overflow checks. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 08/04/2015 04:56 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 30.07.2015 um 07:48 schrieb Dongsheng Yang: >> Currently, budget subsystem in ubifs are working on budgeting [...] >> #endif >> + unsigned int new_block_num; >> + unsigned int dirtied_block_num; > > Why are these not under UBIFS_DEBUG? > I like the overflow checks. Sorry for the late reply. I did not find the overflow checks in my reading. Could you help to explain what kind of the check is it? and why we define in different way with UBIFS_DEBUG defined or not. And, Where did we define the UBIFS_DEBUG? I did not get the design of this macro. :( Yang > > Thanks, > //richard > . > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Am 21.08.2015 um 07:59 schrieb Dongsheng Yang: > On 08/04/2015 04:56 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Am 30.07.2015 um 07:48 schrieb Dongsheng Yang: >>> Currently, budget subsystem in ubifs are working on budgeting > > [...] >>> #endif >>> + unsigned int new_block_num; >>> + unsigned int dirtied_block_num; >> >> Why are these not under UBIFS_DEBUG? >> I like the overflow checks. > > Sorry for the late reply. > > I did not find the overflow checks in my reading. > Could you help to explain what kind of the check > is it? and why we define in different way with > UBIFS_DEBUG defined or not. AFAICT the idea is that you see it from the value from a crash dump. i.e. if new_page is > 2 an overflow happened. I don't know that Artem's original plan was. But we could also automate this checks. > And, Where did we define the UBIFS_DEBUG? I did not > get the design of this macro. :( You have define the macro yourself. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 08/21/2015 03:12 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 21.08.2015 um 07:59 schrieb Dongsheng Yang: >> On 08/04/2015 04:56 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >>> Am 30.07.2015 um 07:48 schrieb Dongsheng Yang: >>>> Currently, budget subsystem in ubifs are working on budgeting >> >> [...] >>>> #endif >>>> + unsigned int new_block_num; >>>> + unsigned int dirtied_block_num; >>> >>> Why are these not under UBIFS_DEBUG? >>> I like the overflow checks. >> >> Sorry for the late reply. >> >> I did not find the overflow checks in my reading. >> Could you help to explain what kind of the check >> is it? and why we define in different way with >> UBIFS_DEBUG defined or not. > > AFAICT the idea is that you see it from the value > from a crash dump. > i.e. if new_page is > 2 an overflow happened. Thanx, on my second thought, the new_block could be unsigned int :1. Because there should be no reading size larger than one block size. Okey, thanx for your good suggestion here. I will update it in next version. :) > > I don't know that Artem's original plan was. > But we could also automate this checks. > >> And, Where did we define the UBIFS_DEBUG? I did not >> get the design of this macro. :( > > You have define the macro yourself. But what is the purpose of UBIFS_DEBUG? I mean, why we want to define the new_page as unsigned int rather than bit field of unsigned int :1 in UBIFS_DEBUG mode? Okey, defining it in bit mode is for overflow checking, I agree. But why we define it in non-bit mode when UBIFS_DEBUG defined. It's confusing to me. :( Thanx Yang > > Thanks, > //richard > . > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/fs/ubifs/budget.c b/fs/ubifs/budget.c index 11a11b3..ba4e530 100644 --- a/fs/ubifs/budget.c +++ b/fs/ubifs/budget.c @@ -397,6 +397,8 @@ static int calc_data_growth(const struct ubifs_info *c, data_growth += c->bi.page_budget; if (req->new_dent) data_growth += c->bi.dent_budget; + if (req->new_block_num) + data_growth += c->bi.block_budget * req->new_block_num; data_growth += req->new_ino_d; return data_growth; } @@ -418,6 +420,8 @@ static int calc_dd_growth(const struct ubifs_info *c, dd_growth += c->bi.inode_budget << (req->dirtied_ino - 1); if (req->mod_dent) dd_growth += c->bi.dent_budget; + if (req->dirtied_block_num) + dd_growth += c->bi.block_budget * req->dirtied_block_num; dd_growth += req->dirtied_ino_d; return dd_growth; } diff --git a/fs/ubifs/debug.c b/fs/ubifs/debug.c index 4c46a98..cafd592 100644 --- a/fs/ubifs/debug.c +++ b/fs/ubifs/debug.c @@ -556,6 +556,8 @@ void ubifs_dump_budget_req(const struct ubifs_budget_req *req) req->new_page, req->dirtied_page); pr_err("\tnew_dent %d, mod_dent %d\n", req->new_dent, req->mod_dent); + pr_err("\tnew_block %d, dirtied_block %d\n", + req->new_block_num, req->dirtied_block_num); pr_err("\tidx_growth %d\n", req->idx_growth); pr_err("\tdata_growth %d dd_growth %d\n", req->data_growth, req->dd_growth); diff --git a/fs/ubifs/super.c b/fs/ubifs/super.c index c643261..eb04e42 100644 --- a/fs/ubifs/super.c +++ b/fs/ubifs/super.c @@ -698,6 +698,7 @@ static int init_constants_sb(struct ubifs_info *c) c->bi.page_budget = UBIFS_MAX_DATA_NODE_SZ * UBIFS_BLOCKS_PER_PAGE; c->bi.inode_budget = UBIFS_INO_NODE_SZ; c->bi.dent_budget = UBIFS_MAX_DENT_NODE_SZ; + c->bi.block_budget = UBIFS_MAX_DATA_NODE_SZ; /* * When the amount of flash space used by buds becomes diff --git a/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h b/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h index 3b5e932..71b79b5 100644 --- a/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h +++ b/fs/ubifs/ubifs.h @@ -861,6 +861,8 @@ struct ubifs_compressor { * @new_ino_d: how much data newly created inode contains * @dirtied_ino: how many inodes the operation makes dirty * @dirtied_ino_d: how much data dirtied inode contains + * @new_block_num: how many new blocks + * @dirtied_block_num: how many dirtied blocks * @idx_growth: how much the index will supposedly grow * @data_growth: how much new data the operation will supposedly add * @dd_growth: how much data that makes other data dirty the operation will @@ -902,6 +904,8 @@ struct ubifs_budget_req { unsigned int dirtied_ino; unsigned int dirtied_ino_d; #endif + unsigned int new_block_num; + unsigned int dirtied_block_num; int idx_growth; int data_growth; int dd_growth; @@ -983,6 +987,7 @@ struct ubifs_budg_info { int page_budget; int inode_budget; int dent_budget; + int block_budget; }; struct ubifs_debug_info;
Currently, budget subsystem in ubifs are working on budgeting page-by-page. But sometimes we want to budget a space for one block, e.g for quota file writing. So this commit extend budget subsystem to support blocks budgeting and releasing. Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang <yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> --- fs/ubifs/budget.c | 4 ++++ fs/ubifs/debug.c | 2 ++ fs/ubifs/super.c | 1 + fs/ubifs/ubifs.h | 5 +++++ 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+)