On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 06:11:52AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Compare function is more complex than it needs to be because
> > + * the return value is only 32 bits and we are doing comparisons
> > + * on 64 bit values
> > + */
> > +int
> > +xfs_buf_cmp(
>
> Should be marked static.
>
> > +void
> > +xfs_buf_delwri_sort(
> > + xfs_buftarg_t *target,
> > + struct list_head *list)
> > +{
> > + list_sort(NULL, list, xfs_buf_cmp);
> > +}
>
> Same here. Not sure I would even bother with the wrapper. Also the
> first argument is entirely unused.
>
> > STATIC int
> > xfsbufd(
> > void *data)
> > {
> > + xfs_buftarg_t *target = (xfs_buftarg_t *)data;
> >
> > current->flags |= PF_MEMALLOC;
> >
> > @@ -1739,6 +1774,8 @@ xfsbufd(
> > do {
> > long age = xfs_buf_age_centisecs * msecs_to_jiffies(10);
> > long tout = age;
> > + int count = 0;
> > + struct list_head tmp;
> >
> > if (unlikely(freezing(current))) {
> > set_bit(XBT_FORCE_SLEEP, &target->bt_flags);
> > @@ -1753,11 +1790,10 @@ xfsbufd(
> > schedule_timeout_interruptible(tout);
> >
> > xfs_buf_delwri_split(target, &tmp, age);
> > + xfs_buf_delwri_sort(target, &tmp);
> > while (!list_empty(&tmp)) {
> > + struct xfs_buf *bp;
> > + bp = list_first_entry(&tmp, struct xfs_buf, b_list);
> > list_del_init(&bp->b_list);
> > xfs_buf_iostrategy(bp);
> > count++;
> >
> >
> > if (wait)
> > blk_run_address_space(target->bt_mapping);
> >
> > + /* Now wait for IO to complete if required. */
> > + while (!list_empty(&wait_list)) {
> > + bp = list_first_entry(&wait_list, struct xfs_buf, b_list);
> >
> > list_del_init(&bp->b_list);
> > xfs_iowait(bp);
>
> As a tiny optimization you might want to move this into the if (wait)
> block
All makes sense, will update.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
|