ext4: add cond_resched() to ext4_free_blocks() & ext4_mb_regular_allocator()

For a file systems with a very large number of block groups, if all of
the block group bitmaps are in memory and the file system is
relatively badly fragmented, it's possible ext4_mb_regular_allocator()
to take a long time trying to find a good match.  This is especially
true if the tuning parameter mb_max_to_scan has been sent to a very
large number.  So add a cond_resched() to avoid soft lockup warnings
and to provide better system responsiveness.

For ext4_free_blocks(), if we are deleting a large range of blocks,
and data=journal is enabled so that EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_FORGET is passed,
the loop to call sb_find_get_block() and to call ext4_forget() can
take over 10-15 milliseocnds or more.  So it's better to add a
cond_resched() here a well.

Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>

diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index def8408..1a9c22b 100644 (file)
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -2105,6 +2105,7 @@ repeat:
                group = ac->ac_g_ex.fe_group;
 
                for (i = 0; i < ngroups; group++, i++) {
+                       cond_resched();
                        /*
                         * Artificially restricted ngroups for non-extent
                         * files makes group > ngroups possible on first loop.
@@ -4612,10 +4613,11 @@ void ext4_free_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
                BUG_ON(bh && (count > 1));
 
                for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
+                       cond_resched();
                        if (!bh)
                                tbh = sb_find_get_block(inode->i_sb,
                                                        block + i);
-                       if (unlikely(!tbh))
+                       if (!tbh)
                                continue;
                        ext4_forget(handle, flags & EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_METADATA,
                                    inode, tbh, block + i);