Re: [ext3][kernels >= 2.6.20.7 at least] KDE going comatose when FS is under heavy write load (massive starvation)

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Fri, 04 May 2007 10:57:12 +0400 Alex Tomas <alex@clusterfs.com> wrote:

> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 04 May 2007 10:18:12 +0400 Alex Tomas <alex@clusterfs.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>> Yes, there can be issues with needing to allocate journal space within the
> >>> context of a commit.  But
> >> no-no, this isn't required. we only need to mark pages/blocks within
> >> transaction, otherwise race is possible when we allocate blocks in transaction,
> >> then transacton starts to commit, then we mark pages/blocks to be flushed
> >> before commit.
> > 
> > I don't understand.  Can you please describe the race in more detail?
> 
> if I understood your idea right, then in data=ordered mode, commit thread writes
> all dirty mapped blocks before real commit.
> 
> say, we have two threads: t1 is a thread doing flushing and t2 is a commit thread
> 
> t1					t2
> find dirty inode I
> find some dirty unallocated blocks
> journal_start()
> allocate blocks
> attach them to I
> journal_stop()

I'm still not understanding.  The terms you're using are a bit ambiguous.

What does "find some dirty unallocated blocks" mean?  Find a page which is
dirty and which does not have a disk mapping?

Normally the above operation would be implemented via
ext4_writeback_writepage(), and it runs under lock_page().


> 					going to commit
> 					find inode I dirty
> 					do NOT find these blocks because they're
> 					  allocated only, but pages/bhs aren't mapped
> 					  to them
> 					start commit

I think you're assuming here that commit would be using ->t_sync_datalist
to locate dirty buffer_heads.

But under this proposal, t_sync_datalist just gets removed: the new
ordered-data mode _only_ need to do the sb->inode->page walk.  So if I'm
understanding you, the way in which we'd handle any such race is to make
kjournald's writeback of the dirty pages block in lock_page().  Once it
gets the page lock it can look to see if some other thread has mapped the
page to disk.



It may turn out that kjournald needs a private way of getting at the
I_DIRTY_PAGES inodes to do this properly, but I don't _think_ so.  If we
had the radix-tree-of-dirty-inodes thing then that's easy enough to do
anyway, with a tagged search.  But I expect that a single pass through the
superblock's dirty inodes would suffice for ordered-data.  Files which
have chattr +j would screw things up, as usual.

I assume (hope) that your delayed allocation code implements
->writepages()?  Doing the allocation one-page-at-a-time sounds painful...

> 
> map pages/bhs to just allocate blocks
> 
> 
> so, either we mark pages/bhs someway within journal_start()--journal_stop() or
> commit thread should do lookup for all dirty pages. the latter doesn't sound nice, IMHO.
> 

I don't think I'm understanding you fully yet.