On Tue, 26 Aug 2014, Nick wrote:
On 08/26/2014 06:58 PM, Mandeep Sandhu wrote:
If it's a corner case, it won't be hit often enough right? And if it was hit often enough, it wouldn't be corner case!? :)
These 2 are mutually exclusive!
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Nick <xerofoify@gmail.com> wrote:
After reading through the code in inode.c today , I am curious about the comment and the following code I will paste below. I am curious if this corner case is hit often enough for me to write a patch to improve the speed of this corner case. Furthermore , compress_file_range is the function name, in case you can't guess by the pasted code. Regards Nick 411 /* 412 * we don't want to send crud past the end of i_size through 413 * compression, that's just a waste of CPU time. So, if the 414 * end of the file is before the start of our current 415 * requested range of bytes, we bail out to the uncompressed 416 * cleanup code that can deal with all of this. 417 * 418 * It isn't really the fastest way to fix things, but this is a 419 * very uncommon corner. 420 */ 421 if (actual_end <= start) 422 goto cleanup_and_bail_uncompressed;
_______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies I get that my question is if this corner case is hit, enough for me to write a patch to optimize it. In addition the comment states it isn't but want to known for standard compression workloads in btrfs if it's hit enough for me to work on this and how much speed degradation are me we doing my not writing it better. Nick
Here's how I would go about it: 1. Understand when the case is met (in theory). 2. Try to trigger it on a real system multiple times. 3. Try to explore systematically under what circumstances the case is met and rank them by plausibility (if the notion of plausibility makes any sense in a real world scenario -- I don't know). 4. Estimate cost vs. benefit. I don't know if this is a good way but notice how you can do all this on yourself which I think is a plus for everyone. And if you decide in step 4 to write a patch: 5. Use your results from step 3 to create an environment that benefits from your patch (notice how 4 guarantees that there exists such a system with reasonable connection to real needs). Note the numbers. 6. Test your patch on as many regular configurations as possible. Note the numbers. If it degrades performance on any of those, abort. 7. Do *NOT* send the patch out. Regards, Tobi -- "There's an old saying: Don't change anything... ever!" -- Mr. Monk