Btrfs: test free space only for unclustered allocation

Since the clustered allocation may be taking extents from a different
block group, there's no point in spin-locking and testing the current
block group free space before attempting to allocate space from a
cluster, even more so when we might refrain from even trying the
cluster in the current block group because, after the cluster was set
up, not enough free space remained.  Furthermore, cluster creation
attempts fail fast when the block group doesn't have enough free
space, so the test was completely superfluous.

I've move the free space test past the cluster allocation attempt,
where it is more useful, and arranged for a cluster in the current
block group to be released before trying an unclustered allocation,
when we reach the LOOP_NO_EMPTY_SIZE stage, so that the free space in
the cluster stands a chance of being combined with additional free
space in the block group so as to succeed in the allocation attempt.
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Oliva <oliva@lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>

fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c

@@ -5286,15 +5286,6 @@ static noinline int find_free_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 		if (unlikely(block_group->ro))
 			goto loop;
 
-		spin_lock(&block_group->free_space_ctl->tree_lock);
-		if (cached &&
-		    block_group->free_space_ctl->free_space <
-		    num_bytes + empty_cluster + empty_size) {
-			spin_unlock(&block_group->free_space_ctl->tree_lock);
-			goto loop;
-		}
-		spin_unlock(&block_group->free_space_ctl->tree_lock);
-
 		/*
 		 * Ok we want to try and use the cluster allocator, so
 		 * lets look there
@@ -5340,8 +5331,15 @@ static noinline int find_free_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 			 * plenty of times and not have found
 			 * anything, so we are likely way too
 			 * fragmented for the clustering stuff to find
-			 * anything.  */
-			if (loop >= LOOP_NO_EMPTY_SIZE) {
+			 * anything.
+			 *
+			 * However, if the cluster is taken from the
+			 * current block group, release the cluster
+			 * first, so that we stand a better chance of
+			 * succeeding in the unclustered
+			 * allocation.  */
+			if (loop >= LOOP_NO_EMPTY_SIZE &&
+			    last_ptr->block_group != block_group) {
 				spin_unlock(&last_ptr->refill_lock);
 				goto unclustered_alloc;
 			}
@@ -5352,6 +5350,11 @@ static noinline int find_free_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 			 */
 			btrfs_return_cluster_to_free_space(NULL, last_ptr);
 
+			if (loop >= LOOP_NO_EMPTY_SIZE) {
+				spin_unlock(&last_ptr->refill_lock);
+				goto unclustered_alloc;
+			}
+
 			/* allocate a cluster in this block group */
 			ret = btrfs_find_space_cluster(trans, root,
 					       block_group, last_ptr,
@@ -5392,6 +5395,15 @@ static noinline int find_free_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 		}
 
 unclustered_alloc:
+		spin_lock(&block_group->free_space_ctl->tree_lock);
+		if (cached &&
+		    block_group->free_space_ctl->free_space <
+		    num_bytes + empty_cluster + empty_size) {
+			spin_unlock(&block_group->free_space_ctl->tree_lock);
+			goto loop;
+		}
+		spin_unlock(&block_group->free_space_ctl->tree_lock);
+
 		offset = btrfs_find_space_for_alloc(block_group, search_start,
 						    num_bytes, empty_size);
 		/*