[Top] [All Lists]

[PATCH] xfs: pull up stack_switch check into xfs_bmapi_write

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [PATCH] xfs: pull up stack_switch check into xfs_bmapi_write
From: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:11:29 -0500
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
The stack_switch check currently occurs in __xfs_bmapi_allocate,
which means the stack switch only occurs when xfs_bmapi_allocate()
is called in a loop. Pull the check up before the loop in
xfs_bmapi_write() such that the first iteration of the loop has
consistent behavior.

Signed-off-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>

I was reading through this code and confused myself over whether the stack
switch ever actually occurs. Eric and Ben pointed out on irc (simultaneously,
I might add) the surrounding loop that I had missed, but it wasn't clear whether
the behavior to enable the stack switch after the first iteration was
intentional or not. I'm throwing this out there to either fix the issue or seek
out an explanation for the existing behavior. Thanks!


 fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c |    6 +++---
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c
index c507720..491f35e 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c
@@ -4676,9 +4676,6 @@ __xfs_bmapi_allocate(
                        return error;
-       if (bma->flags & XFS_BMAPI_STACK_SWITCH)
-               bma->stack_switch = 1;
        error = xfs_bmap_alloc(bma);
        if (error)
                return error;
@@ -4952,6 +4949,9 @@ xfs_bmapi_write(
        bma.flist = flist;
        bma.firstblock = firstblock;
+       if (flags & XFS_BMAPI_STACK_SWITCH)
+               bma.stack_switch = 1;
        while (bno < end && n < *nmap) {
                inhole = eof || bma.got.br_startoff > bno;
                wasdelay = !inhole && isnullstartblock(bma.got.br_startblock);

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>