From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: chris.mason@oracle.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] xfs: introduce inode cluster buffer trylocks for xfs_iflush
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:04:44 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110303220444.GN15097@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110303155535.GA12670@infradead.org>
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 10:55:35AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > + * pass through will see the stale flag set on the inode.
> > + */
> > + error = xfs_iflush(ip, SYNC_TRYLOCK | sync_mode);
> > if (sync_mode & SYNC_WAIT) {
> > + if (error == EAGAIN) {
> > + xfs_iunlock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
> > + /* backoff longer than in xfs_ifree_cluster */
> > + delay(2);
>
> Do we really need the delay here? It seems like we'd rather want to
> keep going with scanning the next inode cluster and return here from
> xfs_reclaim_inodes.
I did that because SYNC_WAIT semantics mean "block until the inode
is reclaimed". This is the slow, reliable reclaim path that doesn't
return until the inode is reclaimed, so we have to have a backoff
here to allow xfs_ifree_cluster() to complete it's backoff and gain
the locks successfully thereby allowing the inode to be reclaimed
successfully.
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.h b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.h
> > index 32ba662..0ae48ff 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.h
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.h
> > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ typedef struct xfs_sync_work {
> >
> > int xfs_syncd_init(struct xfs_mount *mp);
> > void xfs_syncd_stop(struct xfs_mount *mp);
> > +void xfs_syncd_queue_sync(struct xfs_mount *mp, int flags);
>
> This hunk belongs into a different patch.
Oops. Will fix.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-03 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-22 22:16 [RFC, PATCH 0/5] xfs: Reduce OOM kill problems under heavy load Dave Chinner
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 1/5] xfs: introduce inode cluster buffer trylocks for xfs_iflush Dave Chinner
2011-03-03 15:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 22:04 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 2/5] xfs: introduce a xfssyncd workqueue Dave Chinner
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 3/5] xfs: convert ENOSPC inode flushing to use new syncd workqueue Dave Chinner
2011-03-03 15:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 22:41 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-04 12:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 4/5] xfs: introduce background inode reclaim work Dave Chinner
2011-03-03 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 22:43 ` Dave Chinner
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 5/5] xfs: kick inode writeback when low on memory Dave Chinner
2011-03-02 3:06 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-02 14:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 2:42 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-03 15:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 16:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-09 5:46 ` 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=20110303220444.GN15097@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.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.