All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: jack@suse.cz
Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] writeback: merge for_kupdate and !for_kupdate requeue io logics
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 22:51:44 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090909150600.583737346@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20090909145141.293229693@intel.com

[-- Attachment #1: writeback-more_io_wait-a.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2511 bytes --]

Unify the logic for kupdate and non-kupdate cases.
There won't be starvation because the inodes requeued into b_more_io or
b_more_io_wait will later be spliced _after_ the remaining inodes in b_io,
hence won't stand in the way of other inodes in the next run.

CC: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Martin Bligh <mbligh@google.com>
Cc: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
---
 fs/fs-writeback.c |   39 ++++++---------------------------------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)

--- linux.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c	2009-09-09 20:47:11.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/fs/fs-writeback.c	2009-09-09 20:48:01.000000000 +0800
@@ -426,45 +426,18 @@ writeback_single_inode(struct inode *ino
 		} else if (mapping_tagged(mapping, PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY)) {
 			/*
 			 * We didn't write back all the pages.  nfs_writepages()
-			 * sometimes bales out without doing anything. Redirty
-			 * the inode; Move it from b_io onto b_more_io/b_dirty.
+			 * sometimes bales out without doing anything.
 			 */
-			/*
-			 * akpm: if the caller was the kupdate function we put
-			 * this inode at the head of b_dirty so it gets first
-			 * consideration.  Otherwise, move it to the tail, for
-			 * the reasons described there.  I'm not really sure
-			 * how much sense this makes.  Presumably I had a good
-			 * reasons for doing it this way, and I'd rather not
-			 * muck with it at present.
-			 */
-			if (wbc->for_kupdate) {
+			inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
+			if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0) {
 				/*
-				 * For the kupdate function we move the inode
-				 * to b_more_io so it will get more writeout as
-				 * soon as the queue becomes uncongested.
+				 * slice used up: queue for next turn
 				 */
-				inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
-				if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0) {
-					/*
-					 * slice used up: queue for next turn
-					 */
-					requeue_io(inode);
-				} else {
-					/*
-					 * somehow blocked: retry later
-					 */
-					redirty_tail(inode);
-				}
+				requeue_io(inode);
 			} else {
 				/*
-				 * Otherwise fully redirty the inode so that
-				 * other inodes on this superblock will get some
-				 * writeout.  Otherwise heavy writing to one
-				 * file would indefinitely suspend writeout of
-				 * all the other files.
+				 * somehow blocked: retry later
 				 */
-				inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
 				redirty_tail(inode);
 			}
 		} else if (atomic_read(&inode->i_count)) {

-- 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-09-09 15:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-09-09 14:51 [RFC][PATCH 0/7] some random writeback fixes Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] writeback: cleanup writeback_single_inode() Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 15:45   ` Jan Kara
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] writeback: fix queue_io() ordering Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 15:53   ` Jan Kara
2009-09-10  1:26     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 14:14       ` Jan Kara
2009-09-10 14:17         ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] writeback: ensure large files are written in MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES chunks Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] writeback: use 64MB MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 23:29   ` Theodore Tso
2009-09-10  0:13     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10  0:13       ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10  4:53     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-10  7:35       ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] writeback: dont abort inode on congestion Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] writeback: balance_dirty_pages() shall write more than dirtied pages Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 15:44   ` Jan Kara
2009-09-10  1:42     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 12:57       ` Chris Mason
2009-09-10 13:21         ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 13:21           ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 14:56           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-10 15:14             ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 15:31               ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-10 15:41                 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 15:54                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-10 16:08                     ` Wu Fengguang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090909150600.583737346@intel.com \
    --to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.