mirror of
https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git
synced 2024-12-02 16:44:10 +08:00
Btrfs: only adjust outstanding_extents when we do a short write
We have this weird dance where we always inc outstanding_extents when we do a O_DIRECT write, even if we allocate the entire range. To get around this we also drop the metadata space if we successfully write. This is an unnecessary dance, we only need to jack up outstanding_extents if we don't satisfy the entire range request in get_blocks_direct, otherwise we are good using our original reservation. So drop the unconditional inc and the drop of the metadata space that we have for the unconditional inc. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Reviewed-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
13212b54d1
commit
3e05bde8c3
@ -7155,6 +7155,7 @@ static int btrfs_get_blocks_direct(struct inode *inode, sector_t iblock,
|
||||
u64 start = iblock << inode->i_blkbits;
|
||||
u64 lockstart, lockend;
|
||||
u64 len = bh_result->b_size;
|
||||
u64 orig_len = len;
|
||||
int unlock_bits = EXTENT_LOCKED;
|
||||
int ret = 0;
|
||||
|
||||
@ -7290,9 +7291,11 @@ unlock:
|
||||
if (start + len > i_size_read(inode))
|
||||
i_size_write(inode, start + len);
|
||||
|
||||
spin_lock(&BTRFS_I(inode)->lock);
|
||||
BTRFS_I(inode)->outstanding_extents++;
|
||||
spin_unlock(&BTRFS_I(inode)->lock);
|
||||
if (len < orig_len) {
|
||||
spin_lock(&BTRFS_I(inode)->lock);
|
||||
BTRFS_I(inode)->outstanding_extents++;
|
||||
spin_unlock(&BTRFS_I(inode)->lock);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
ret = set_extent_bit(&BTRFS_I(inode)->io_tree, lockstart,
|
||||
lockstart + len - 1, EXTENT_DELALLOC, NULL,
|
||||
@ -8073,8 +8076,6 @@ static ssize_t btrfs_direct_IO(int rw, struct kiocb *iocb,
|
||||
else if (ret >= 0 && (size_t)ret < count)
|
||||
btrfs_delalloc_release_space(inode,
|
||||
count - (size_t)ret);
|
||||
else
|
||||
btrfs_delalloc_release_metadata(inode, 0);
|
||||
}
|
||||
out:
|
||||
if (wakeup)
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user