From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/4] writeback: limit write_cache_pages integrity scanning to current EOF
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:13:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100422191309.GC19286@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100420034005.GA15130@dastard>
On Tue 20-04-10 13:40:05, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> sync can currently take a really long time if a concurrent writer is
> extending a file. The problem is that the dirty pages on the address
> space grow in the same direction as write_cache_pages scans, so if
> the writer keeps ahead of writeback, the writeback will not
> terminate until the writer stops adding dirty pages.
>
> For a data integrity sync, we only need to write the pages dirty at
> the time we start the writeback, so we can stop scanning once we get
> to the page that was at the end of the file at the time the scan
> started.
>
> This will prevent operations like copying a large file preventing
> sync from completing as it will not write back pages that were
> dirtied after the sync was started. This does not impact the
> existing integrity guarantees, as any dirty page (old or new)
> within the EOF range at the start of the scan will still be
> captured.
Looks good.
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> ---
> mm/page-writeback.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> index e22af84..4ba2728 100644
> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> @@ -852,7 +852,22 @@ int write_cache_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
> if (wbc->range_start == 0 && wbc->range_end == LLONG_MAX)
> range_whole = 1;
> cycled = 1; /* ignore range_cyclic tests */
> +
> + /*
> + * If this is a data integrity sync, cap the writeback to the
> + * current end of file. Any extension to the file that occurs
> + * after this is a new write and we don't need to write those
> + * pages out to fulfil our data integrity requirements. If we
> + * try to write them out, we can get stuck in this scan until
> + * the concurrent writer stops adding dirty pages and extending
> + * EOF.
> + */
> + if (wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_ALL &&
> + wbc->range_end == LLONG_MAX) {
> + end = i_size_read(mapping->host) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
> + }
> }
> +
> retry:
> done_index = index;
> while (!done && (index <= end)) {
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/4] writeback: limit write_cache_pages integrity scanning to current EOF
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:13:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100422191309.GC19286@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100420034005.GA15130@dastard>
On Tue 20-04-10 13:40:05, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> sync can currently take a really long time if a concurrent writer is
> extending a file. The problem is that the dirty pages on the address
> space grow in the same direction as write_cache_pages scans, so if
> the writer keeps ahead of writeback, the writeback will not
> terminate until the writer stops adding dirty pages.
>
> For a data integrity sync, we only need to write the pages dirty at
> the time we start the writeback, so we can stop scanning once we get
> to the page that was at the end of the file at the time the scan
> started.
>
> This will prevent operations like copying a large file preventing
> sync from completing as it will not write back pages that were
> dirtied after the sync was started. This does not impact the
> existing integrity guarantees, as any dirty page (old or new)
> within the EOF range at the start of the scan will still be
> captured.
Looks good.
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> ---
> mm/page-writeback.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> index e22af84..4ba2728 100644
> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> @@ -852,7 +852,22 @@ int write_cache_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
> if (wbc->range_start == 0 && wbc->range_end == LLONG_MAX)
> range_whole = 1;
> cycled = 1; /* ignore range_cyclic tests */
> +
> + /*
> + * If this is a data integrity sync, cap the writeback to the
> + * current end of file. Any extension to the file that occurs
> + * after this is a new write and we don't need to write those
> + * pages out to fulfil our data integrity requirements. If we
> + * try to write them out, we can get stuck in this scan until
> + * the concurrent writer stops adding dirty pages and extending
> + * EOF.
> + */
> + if (wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_ALL &&
> + wbc->range_end == LLONG_MAX) {
> + end = i_size_read(mapping->host) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
> + }
> }
> +
> retry:
> done_index = index;
> while (!done && (index <= end)) {
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-22 19:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-20 2:41 [PATCH 0/4] writeback: tracing and wbc->nr_to_write fixes Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 2:41 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 2:41 ` [PATCH 1/4] writeback: initial tracing support Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 2:41 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-21 15:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-05-21 15:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-04-20 2:41 ` [PATCH 2/4] writeback: Add tracing to balance_dirty_pages Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 2:41 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 2:41 ` [PATCH 3/4] writeback: pay attention to wbc->nr_to_write in write_cache_pages Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 2:41 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-22 19:07 ` Jan Kara
2010-04-22 19:07 ` Jan Kara
2010-04-25 3:33 ` tytso
2010-04-25 3:33 ` tytso
2010-04-25 3:33 ` tytso
2010-04-26 1:49 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-26 1:49 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-26 1:49 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-26 2:43 ` tytso
2010-04-26 2:43 ` tytso
2010-04-26 2:45 ` tytso
2010-04-26 2:45 ` tytso
2010-04-27 3:30 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-27 3:30 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-29 21:39 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-29 21:39 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-30 6:01 ` Aneesh Kumar K. V
2010-04-30 6:01 ` Aneesh Kumar K. V
2010-04-30 19:43 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-30 19:43 ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-01 19:47 ` tytso
2010-05-01 19:47 ` tytso
2010-04-20 2:41 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs: remove nr_to_write writeback windup Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 2:41 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-22 19:09 ` Jan Kara
2010-04-22 19:09 ` Jan Kara
2010-04-26 0:46 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-26 0:46 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 3:40 ` [PATCH 5/4] writeback: limit write_cache_pages integrity scanning to current EOF Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 3:40 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 23:28 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-04-20 23:28 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-04-20 23:31 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 23:31 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-22 19:13 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2010-04-22 19:13 ` Jan Kara
2010-04-20 12:02 ` [PATCH 0/4] writeback: tracing and wbc->nr_to_write fixes Richard Kennedy
2010-04-20 12:02 ` Richard Kennedy
2010-04-20 23:29 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-20 23:29 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-21 15:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-05-21 15:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-05-22 0:09 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-22 0:09 ` 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=20100422191309.GC19286@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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.