All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Ted Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Remove extent tree purging from ext4_da_page_release_reservation()
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 19:52:34 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130725115234.GA26044@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130724200536.GC27307@quack.suse.cz>

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:05:36PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
>   Hi Zheng,
> 
> On Fri 19-07-13 08:44:39, Zheng Liu wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:10:15AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > ext4_da_page_release_reservation() gets called from
> > > ext4_da_invalidatepage(). This function is used when we are truncating
> > > page cache for punch hole or truncate operations. In either case these
> > > operations take care of removing extents from the extent tree. This is
> > > more efficient and the code in ext4_da_page_release_reservation() is
> > > actually buggy anyway. So just remove it.
> > 
> > I remember that I try to remove the entry from extent status tree here
> > because at the end of this function it tries to relase the reserved
> > space for delalloc.  For 4k block we can simply release it because
> > ->s_cluster_ratio == 1.  But when bigalloc is enabled, we need to
> > determine whether we can release the reserved space according to the
> > result of ext4_find_delalloc_cluster() as the comment described.  If we
> > don't remove the entry from extent status tree here, we could lost some
> > spaces that could be reused by other files.  If I remember correctly, I
> > have hitted a warning message when I run xfstests to test it.  These
> > days I try to trigger it using xfstests but I failed.  Have you seen a
> > prblem that is caused by this code?  Maybe we need to refactor out the
> > code and release the reserved space outside this function.
>   Ah, I see. No, I didn't observe any problem due to this code, I just
> didn't understand why is it there. Also when blocksize < pagesize, the code
> is wrong because delayed buffers to release need not be contiguous so
> ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, to_release) may not free all the buffers
> we want. But subsequent extent tree truncation in ext4_ext_truncate() hides
> this problem.
> 
> So I think we might just change the condition:
> 
> if (to_release) {
> 
> to
> 
> if (to_release && sbi->s_cluster_ratio > 1) {
> 
> and add explanatory comment why cluster_ratio > 1 needs the truncation and
> other cases don't. It will also save some needlessly burned CPU cycles
> spent when manipulating extent tree.

Yes, thanks for pointing it out.  I attach a patch below.  Could you
please review it?

Thanks,
                                                - Zheng

Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ext4: remove the entry from es tree when bigalloc is enabled

From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

Now in ext4_da_page_release_reservation() we remove the entry from es
tree if to_release != 0.  But there are two issues.  One is that it is
wrong when blocksize != pagesize, another is that we don't need to do
this if ->s_cluster_ratio == 1 because we will remove the entry in
ext4_truncate/ext4_punch_hole.  Here we need to do this just because
when ->s_cluster_ratio > 1 we will determine whether we can release
the reserved space according to ext4_find_delalloc_cluster().

This commit tries to fix these problems.  Now we remove the entry from
es tree only if ->s_cluster_ratio > 1.

Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
---
 fs/ext4/inode.c |   10 +++++++++-
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
index ba33c67..e0c8623 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
@@ -1387,7 +1387,15 @@ static void ext4_da_page_release_reservation(struct page *page,
 		curr_off = next_off;
 	} while ((bh = bh->b_this_page) != head);
 
-	if (to_release) {
+	/*
+	 * Here we need to remove the entry from es tree because when bigalloc
+	 * is enabled we need to determine whether we can release the reserved
+	 * space according to the result of ext4_find_delalloc_cluster().
+	 *
+	 * If bigalloc is disabled, we don't need to do this here because these
+	 * extries in es tree will be removed in ext4_truncate/ext4_punch_hole.
+	 */
+	if (sbi->s_cluster_ratio > 1 && to_release) {
 		lblk = page->index << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - inode->i_blkbits);
 		ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, to_release);
 	}
-- 
1.7.9.7


  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-25 11:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-17 22:10 [PATCH] ext4: Remove extent tree purging from ext4_da_page_release_reservation() Jan Kara
2013-07-19  0:44 ` Zheng Liu
2013-07-24 20:05   ` Jan Kara
2013-07-25 11:52     ` Zheng Liu [this message]
2013-07-25 14:05       ` Jan Kara
2013-07-25 23:36         ` Zheng Liu

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=20130725115234.GA26044@gmail.com \
    --to=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=wenqing.lz@taobao.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.