Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski <> | Subject | [PATCH 157/222] udf: don't increment lenExtents while writing to a hole | Date | Wed, 16 Jan 2013 13:55:57 -0200 |
| |
3.5.7.3 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>
commit fb719c59bdb4fca86ee1fd1f42ab3735ca12b6b2 upstream.
Incrementing lenExtents even while writing to a hole is bad for performance as calls to udf_discard_prealloc and udf_truncate_tail_extent would not return from start if isize != lenExtents
Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Ashish Sangwan <a.sangwan@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski <herton.krzesinski@canonical.com> --- fs/udf/inode.c | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/udf/inode.c b/fs/udf/inode.c index 8873c47..fb65df5 100644 --- a/fs/udf/inode.c +++ b/fs/udf/inode.c @@ -574,6 +574,7 @@ static sector_t inode_getblk(struct inode *inode, sector_t block, struct udf_inode_info *iinfo = UDF_I(inode); int goal = 0, pgoal = iinfo->i_location.logicalBlockNum; int lastblock = 0; + bool isBeyondEOF; *err = 0; *new = 0; @@ -653,7 +654,7 @@ static sector_t inode_getblk(struct inode *inode, sector_t block, /* Are we beyond EOF? */ if (etype == -1) { int ret; - + isBeyondEOF = 1; if (count) { if (c) laarr[0] = laarr[1]; @@ -696,6 +697,7 @@ static sector_t inode_getblk(struct inode *inode, sector_t block, endnum = c + 1; lastblock = 1; } else { + isBeyondEOF = 0; endnum = startnum = ((count > 2) ? 2 : count); /* if the current extent is in position 0, @@ -743,7 +745,8 @@ static sector_t inode_getblk(struct inode *inode, sector_t block, *err = -ENOSPC; return 0; } - iinfo->i_lenExtents += inode->i_sb->s_blocksize; + if (isBeyondEOF) + iinfo->i_lenExtents += inode->i_sb->s_blocksize; } /* if the extent the requsted block is located in contains multiple -- 1.7.9.5
| |