On 11 Feb 2025, at 19:57, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 11 Feb 2025, at 10:50, Zi Yan wrote:
>
>> It is a preparation patch for non-uniform folio split, which always split
>> a folio into half iteratively, and minimal xarray entry split.
>>
>> Currently, xas_split_alloc() and xas_split() always split all slots from a
>> multi-index entry. They cost the same number of xa_node as the to-be-split
>> slots. For example, to split an order-9 entry, which takes 2^(9-6)=8
>> slots, assuming XA_CHUNK_SHIFT is 6 (!CONFIG_BASE_SMALL), 8 xa_node are
>> needed. Instead xas_try_split() is intended to be used iteratively to split
>> the order-9 entry into 2 order-8 entries, then split one order-8 entry,
>> based on the given index, to 2 order-7 entries, ..., and split one order-1
>> entry to 2 order-0 entries. When splitting the order-6 entry and a new
>> xa_node is needed, xas_try_split() will try to allocate one if possible.
>> As a result, xas_try_split() would only need one xa_node instead of 8.
>>
>> When a new xa_node is needed during the split, xas_try_split() can try to
>> allocate one but no more. -ENOMEM will be return if a node cannot be
>> allocated. -EINVAL will be return if a sibling node is split or
>> cascade split happens, where two or more new nodes are needed, and these
>> are not supported by xas_try_split().
>>
>> xas_split_alloc() and xas_split() split an order-9 to order-0:
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> | | | | | | | | |
>> | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
>> | | | | | | | | |
>> ---------------------------------
>> | | | |
>> ------- --- --- -------
>> | | ... | |
>> V V V V
>> ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
>> | xa_node | | xa_node | ... | xa_node | | xa_node |
>> ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
>>
>> xas_try_split() splits an order-9 to order-0:
>> ---------------------------------
>> | | | | | | | | |
>> | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
>> | | | | | | | | |
>> ---------------------------------
>> |
>> |
>> V
>> -----------
>> | xa_node |
>> -----------
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <z...@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/core-api/xarray.rst | 14 ++-
>> include/linux/xarray.h | 7 ++
>> lib/test_xarray.c | 47 +++++++++++
>> lib/xarray.c | 136 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>> tools/testing/radix-tree/Makefile | 1 +
>> 5 files changed, 188 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Do you mind folding the diff below to this one? I changed the function
> name but forgot the one in the xarray test. Thanks.
>From bdf3b10f2ebcd09898ba7a277ac7107c25b8c71b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Zi Yan <z...@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 20:48:55 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] correct the function name.
Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <z...@nvidia.com>
---
lib/test_xarray.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/test_xarray.c b/lib/test_xarray.c
index 598ca38a2f5b..cc2dd325158f 100644
--- a/lib/test_xarray.c
+++ b/lib/test_xarray.c
@@ -1868,7 +1868,7 @@ static void check_split_2(struct xarray *xa, unsigned
long index,
xa_set_mark(xa, index, XA_MARK_1);
xas_lock(&xas);
- xas_try_halve(&xas, xa, order, GFP_KERNEL);
+ xas_try_split(&xas, xa, order, GFP_KERNEL);
if (((new_order / XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) < (order / XA_CHUNK_SHIFT)) &&
new_order < order - 1) {
XA_BUG_ON(xa, !xas_error(&xas) || xas_error(&xas) != -EINVAL);
--
2.47.2
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
