From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com>,
Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] xfs: don't use in-core per-cpu fdblocks for !lazysbcount
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:42:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210420174246.GP3122264@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210420110855.2961626-1-hsiangkao@redhat.com>
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 07:08:54PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> There are many paths which could trigger xfs_log_sb(), e.g.
> xfs_bmap_add_attrfork()
> -> xfs_log_sb()
> , which overrides on-disk fdblocks by in-core per-CPU fdblocks.
>
> However, for !lazysbcount cases, on-disk fdblocks is actually updated
> by xfs_trans_apply_sb_deltas(), and generally it isn't equal to
> in-core per-CPU fdblocks due to xfs_reserve_blocks() or whatever,
> see the comment in xfs_unmountfs().
>
> It could be observed by the following steps reported by Zorro:
>
> 1. mkfs.xfs -f -l lazy-count=0 -m crc=0 $dev
> 2. mount $dev $mnt
> 3. fsstress -d $mnt -p 100 -n 1000 (maybe need more or less io load)
> 4. umount $mnt
> 5. xfs_repair -n $dev
>
> yet due to commit f46e5a174655 ("xfs: fold sbcount quiesce logging
> into log covering"), xfs_sync_sb() will also be triggered if log
> covering is needed and !lazysbcount when xfs_unmountfs(), so hard
> to reproduce on kernel 5.12+ for clean unmount.
>
> on-disk sb_icount and sb_ifree are also updated in
> xfs_trans_apply_sb_deltas() for !lazysbcount cases, however, which
> are always equal to per-CPU counters, so only fdblocks matters.
>
> After this patch, I've seen no strange so far on older kernels
> for the testcase above without lazysbcount.
>
> Reported-by: Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com>
Still seems a bit roundabout to me, but fmeh, this is all deprecated
anyways, so:
Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
--D
> ---
> changes since v1:
> - update commit message.
>
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c | 8 +++++++-
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> index 60e6d255e5e2..423dada3f64c 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> @@ -928,7 +928,13 @@ xfs_log_sb(
>
> mp->m_sb.sb_icount = percpu_counter_sum(&mp->m_icount);
> mp->m_sb.sb_ifree = percpu_counter_sum(&mp->m_ifree);
> - mp->m_sb.sb_fdblocks = percpu_counter_sum(&mp->m_fdblocks);
> + if (!xfs_sb_version_haslazysbcount(&mp->m_sb)) {
> + struct xfs_dsb *dsb = bp->b_addr;
> +
> + mp->m_sb.sb_fdblocks = be64_to_cpu(dsb->sb_fdblocks);
> + } else {
> + mp->m_sb.sb_fdblocks = percpu_counter_sum(&mp->m_fdblocks);
> + }
>
> xfs_sb_to_disk(bp->b_addr, &mp->m_sb);
> xfs_trans_buf_set_type(tp, bp, XFS_BLFT_SB_BUF);
> --
> 2.27.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-20 17:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-20 11:08 [PATCH v2 1/2] xfs: don't use in-core per-cpu fdblocks for !lazysbcount Gao Xiang
2021-04-20 11:08 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] xfs: turn on lazysbcount unconditionally Gao Xiang
2021-04-20 16:22 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-20 20:00 ` Gao Xiang
2021-04-22 0:01 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-22 1:51 ` Gao Xiang
2021-04-22 5:11 ` Zorro Lang
2021-04-20 17:42 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2021-04-20 21:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] xfs: don't use in-core per-cpu fdblocks for !lazysbcount Dave Chinner
2021-04-20 21:54 ` Gao Xiang
2021-04-21 1:45 ` Dave Chinner
2021-04-21 3:01 ` Gao Xiang
2021-04-22 1:44 ` Dave Chinner
2021-04-22 2:06 ` Gao Xiang
2021-04-22 3:01 ` Dave Chinner
2021-04-22 3:12 ` Gao Xiang
2021-04-22 15:58 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=20210420174246.GP3122264@magnolia \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=cmaiolino@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hsiangkao@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zlang@redhat.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.