From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
chris.mason@oracle.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] xfs: convert ENOSPC inode flushing to use new syncd workqueue
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 07:40:18 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110304124018.GA29062@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110303224105.GP15097@dastard>
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 09:41:05AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 10:34:10AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > I still don't see any point in having the ENOSPC flushing moved to a
> > different context.
>
> IIRC, stack usage has always been an issue, and we also call
> xfs_flush_inodes() with the XFS_IOLOCK held (from
> xfs_iomap_write_delay()) so the alternate context was used to avoid
> deadlocks. I don't think we have that deadlock problem now thanks to
> being able to combine SYNC_TRYLOCK | SYNC_WAIT flags, but I'm not
> sure we can ignore the stack issues.
Given that we wait for completion of the syncing in the caller moving it
to a different context does not help with any deadlocks. It just makes
them impossible to detect using lockdep.
> I've also realised the work_pending() check is unnecessary, as is
> the lock, because queue_work() will only queue new work if the work
> item isn't already pending so there's no need to check it here.
> Hence all this actually needs to do is:
>
> queue_work()
> flush_work_sync()
or in fact only use the writeback_inodes_sb_if_idle call you added
later. That also causes writeback of data from the flusher threads.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-04 12:37 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
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 [this message]
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=20110304124018.GA29062@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--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.