On 4/20/25 11:07, Carlos Maiolino wrote: ...
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_zone_gc.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_zone_gc.c index 8c541ca71872..6dde2a680e75 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_zone_gc.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_zone_gc.c @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ bool xfs_zoned_need_gc( struct xfs_mount *mp) { - s64 available, free; + u64 available, free, rem; if (!xfs_group_marked(mp, XG_TYPE_RTG, XFS_RTG_RECLAIMABLE)) return false; @@ -183,7 +183,12 @@ xfs_zoned_need_gc( return true; free = xfs_estimate_freecounter(mp, XC_FREE_RTEXTENTS); - if (available < mult_frac(free, mp->m_zonegc_low_space, 100)) + + rem = do_div(free, 100); + free = free * mp->m_zonegc_low_space + + div_u64(rem * mp->m_zonegc_low_space, 100); + + if (available < free) return true;You're essentially open coding mult_frac(), if we can get mult_frac() to work on 64-bit too (or add a 64-bit version), that seems a better generic solution.
Yes, I know. Problem is that getting more than one maintainer involved tends to make it exponentially more difficult to get anything accepted. With that in mind, I prefer open coded solutions like the one I suggested above. A generic solution is then still possible, but it is disconnected from solving the immediate problem. Guenter
