Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
ext4: allocate stripe-multiple IOs on stripe boundaries
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
For some reason, today mballoc only allocates IOs which are exactly
stripe-sized on a stripe boundary.  If you have a multiple (say, a
128k IO on a 64k stripe) you may end up unaligned.

It seems to me that a simple change to align stripe-multiple IOs
on stripe boundaries would be a very good idea, unless this breaks
some other mballoc heuristic for some reason...

Reported-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
  • Loading branch information
Eric Sandeen authored and Theodore Ts'o committed Jul 27, 2010
1 parent 5b3ff23 commit 506bf2d
Showing 1 changed file with 3 additions and 4 deletions.
7 changes: 3 additions & 4 deletions fs/ext4/mballoc.c
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1822,8 +1822,7 @@ void ext4_mb_complex_scan_group(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,

/*
* This is a special case for storages like raid5
* we try to find stripe-aligned chunks for stripe-size requests
* XXX should do so at least for multiples of stripe size as well
* we try to find stripe-aligned chunks for stripe-size-multiple requests
*/
static noinline_for_stack
void ext4_mb_scan_aligned(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -2092,8 +2091,8 @@ ext4_mb_regular_allocator(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac)
ac->ac_groups_scanned++;
if (cr == 0)
ext4_mb_simple_scan_group(ac, &e4b);
else if (cr == 1 &&
ac->ac_g_ex.fe_len == sbi->s_stripe)
else if (cr == 1 && sbi->s_stripe &&
!(ac->ac_g_ex.fe_len % sbi->s_stripe))
ext4_mb_scan_aligned(ac, &e4b);
else
ext4_mb_complex_scan_group(ac, &e4b);
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 506bf2d

Please sign in to comment.