All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] xfs: Use delayed write for inodes rather than async
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:36:21 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100108103620.GA11769@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1262649861-28530-2-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>

> +++ b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.c
> @@ -460,8 +460,8 @@ xfs_quiesce_fs(
>  {
>  	int	count = 0, pincount;
>  
> +	xfs_reclaim_inodes(mp, XFS_IFLUSH_DELWRI);
>  	xfs_flush_buftarg(mp->m_ddev_targp, 0);
> -	xfs_reclaim_inodes(mp, XFS_IFLUSH_DELWRI_ELSE_ASYNC);

Hmm.  I think the current code here is simply wrong.  We do need to
flush all delwri buffers after the inode reclaim.  Maybe we should
get this hunk in for .33?

> -		xfs_reclaim_inodes(mp, XFS_IFLUSH_DELWRI_ELSE_ASYNC);
> +		xfs_reclaim_inodes(mp, XFS_IFLUSH_DELWRI);
>  		/* dgc: errors ignored here */
>  		error = xfs_qm_sync(mp, SYNC_TRYLOCK);
>  		error = xfs_sync_fsdata(mp, SYNC_TRYLOCK);
> @@ -687,7 +687,7 @@ xfs_reclaim_inode(
>  		spin_unlock(&ip->i_flags_lock);
>  		write_unlock(&pag->pag_ici_lock);
>  		xfs_perag_put(pag);
> -		return -EAGAIN;
> +		return EAGAIN;

Unrelated bug in the upsteam code.  But your inode direct reclaim
changes should sort this out already.

> @@ -3012,16 +3001,6 @@ xfs_iflush_int(
>  	iip = ip->i_itemp;
>  	mp = ip->i_mount;
>  
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * If the inode isn't dirty, then just release the inode
> -	 * flush lock and do nothing.
> -	 */
> -	if (xfs_inode_clean(ip)) {
> -		xfs_ifunlock(ip);
> -		return 0;
> -	}
> -

while we now have this check in xfs_reclaim_inode there still are
various other callers.  Did you audit them all to make sure we don't
need the check here anymore?

> index 223d9c3..16c4654 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c
> @@ -1444,7 +1444,14 @@ xfs_unmountfs(
>  	 * need to force the log first.
>  	 */
>  	xfs_log_force(mp, (xfs_lsn_t)0, XFS_LOG_FORCE | XFS_LOG_SYNC);
> -	xfs_reclaim_inodes(mp, XFS_IFLUSH_ASYNC);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * flush the delwri buffers before the reclaim so that it doesn't
> +	 * block for a long time waiting to reclaim inodes that are already
> +	 * in the delwri state.
> +	 */
> +	XFS_bflush(mp->m_ddev_targp);
> +	xfs_reclaim_inodes(mp, XFS_IFLUSH_SYNC);

Wouldn't it be more efficient to also write them out delwri and then
flush out the delwri queue again?

Either way the current code seems fishy to me with an async writeout
here.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2010-01-08 10:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-01-05  0:04 [PATCH 0/3] Kill async inode writeback V2 Dave Chinner
2010-01-05  0:04 ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs: Use delayed write for inodes rather than async Dave Chinner
2010-01-08 10:36   ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2010-01-08 11:05     ` Dave Chinner
2010-01-08 11:14       ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-01-05  0:04 ` [PATCH 2/3] xfs: Don't issue buffer IO direct from AIL push Dave Chinner
2010-01-08 11:07   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-01-08 11:15     ` Dave Chinner
2010-01-05  0:04 ` [PATCH 3/3] xfs: Sort delayed write buffers before dispatch Dave Chinner
2010-01-08 11:11   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-01-08 11:17     ` Dave Chinner
2010-01-06 18:08 ` [PATCH 0/3] Kill async inode writeback V2 Christoph Hellwig
2010-01-06 22:49   ` Dave Chinner
2010-01-08 10:14     ` Christoph Hellwig
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-01-02  3:03 [RFC, PATCH 0/3] Kill async inode writeback Dave Chinner
2010-01-02  3:03 ` [PATCH 1/3] XFS: Use delayed write for inodes rather than async Dave Chinner

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=20100108103620.GA11769@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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.