All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] libxfs: keep unflushable buffers off the cache MRUs
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 13:34:17 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160105183417.GE38749@bfoster.bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1450733829-9319-10-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 08:37:09AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> 
> There's no point trying to free buffers that are dirty and return
> errors on flush as we have to keep them around until the corruption
> is fixed. Hence if we fail to flush an inode during a cache shake,
> move the buffer to a special dirty MRU list that the cache does not
> shake. This prevents memory pressure from seeing these buffers, but
> allows subsequent cache lookups to still find them through the hash.
> This ensures we don't waste huge amounts of CPU trying to flush and
> reclaim buffers that canot be flushed or reclaimed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> ---
>  include/cache.h |  3 ++-
>  libxfs/cache.c  | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
...
> diff --git a/libxfs/cache.c b/libxfs/cache.c
> index a48ebd9..d5ea461 100644
> --- a/libxfs/cache.c
> +++ b/libxfs/cache.c
...
> @@ -202,10 +223,11 @@ cache_shake(
>  	struct cache_node *	node;
>  	unsigned int		count;
>  
> -	ASSERT(priority <= CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY);
> -	if (priority > CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY)
> +	ASSERT(priority <= CACHE_DIRTY_PRIORITY);
> +	if (priority > CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY && !all)
>  		priority = 0;
>  
> +

Extra newline. FWIW, it also looks like the only cache_shake() caller
where all == 0 already prevents calling with priority >
CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY. I think a brief comment in one or both places with
regard to why >max priority is skipped unless 'all == 1' would be good,
though.

Also, it looks like the loop in cache_report() could be updated to dump
the dirty priority mru entry count.

Finally, what happens once a buffer on the dirty mru is fully repaired,
rewritten and released? Is it placed right back on the "unshakeable"
dirty mru or is cn_priority updated somewhere? On further digging, it
looks like a subsequent buffer lookup (__cache_lookup()) drops the
priority, though it appears to be designed to deal with prefetched
buffers and the associated B_INODE..B_DIR_BMAP mappings.

Brian

>  	mru = &cache->c_mrus[priority];
>  	count = 0;
>  	list_head_init(&temp);
> @@ -221,6 +243,8 @@ cache_shake(
>  
>  		/* can't release dirty objects */
>  		if (cache->flush(node)) {
> +			cache_move_to_dirty_mru(cache, node);
> +			mru->cm_count--;
>  			pthread_mutex_unlock(&node->cn_mutex);
>  			continue;
>  		}
> @@ -578,7 +602,7 @@ cache_purge(
>  {
>  	int			i;
>  
> -	for (i = 0; i <= CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY; i++)
> +	for (i = 0; i <= CACHE_DIRTY_PRIORITY; i++)
>  		cache_shake(cache, i, 1);
>  
>  #ifdef CACHE_DEBUG
> -- 
> 2.5.0
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

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

  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-05 18:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-21 21:37 [PATCH 0/9] xfsprogs: big, broken filesystems cause pain Dave Chinner
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 1/9] metadump: clean up btree block region zeroing Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:11   ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 2/9] metadump: bounds check btree block regions being zeroed Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:11   ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 3/9] xfs_mdrestore: correctly account bytes read Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:12   ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 4/9] repair: parallelise phase 7 Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:12   ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 5/9] repair: parallelise uncertin inode processing in phase 3 Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:12   ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 6/9] libxfs: directory node splitting does not have an extra block Dave Chinner
2016-01-05 18:34   ` Brian Foster
2016-01-05 22:07     ` Dave Chinner
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 7/9] libxfs: don't discard dirty buffers Dave Chinner
2016-01-05 18:34   ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 8/9] libxfs: don't repeatedly shake unwritable buffers Dave Chinner
2016-01-05 18:34   ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 9/9] libxfs: keep unflushable buffers off the cache MRUs Dave Chinner
2016-01-05 18:34   ` Brian Foster [this message]
2016-01-05 23:58     ` 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=20160105183417.GE38749@bfoster.bfoster \
    --to=bfoster@redhat.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.