From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
chris.mason@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, hch@infradead.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz,
yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com, richard@rsk.demon.co.uk,
damien.wyart@free.fr, fweisbec@gmail.com, Alan.Brunelle@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushing data
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:27:09 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A53694D.2010905@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1245926523-21959-3-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Hi Jens, I've noticed the following _possible_ issue.
Jens Axboe wrote:
> +static int bdi_forker_task(void *ptr)
> +{
> + struct backing_dev_info *me = ptr;
> +
> + for (;;) {
> + struct backing_dev_info *bdi, *tmp;
> +
> + /*
> + * Temporary measure, we want to make sure we don't see
> + * dirty data on the default backing_dev_info
> + */
> + if (bdi_has_dirty_io(me))
> + bdi_flush_io(me);
> +
> + spin_lock(&bdi_lock);
> +
> + /*
> + * Check if any existing bdi's have dirty data without
> + * a thread registered. If so, set that up.
> + */
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(bdi, tmp, &bdi_list, bdi_list) {
> + if (bdi->task || !bdi_has_dirty_io(bdi))
> + continue;
> +
> + bdi_add_default_flusher_task(bdi);
> + }
> +
> + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> +
What happens if we are preempted here? Since we have TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
state, we will not come back unless some other task wakes us up. Who
would wake us up in this case?
> + if (list_empty(&bdi_pending_list)) {
> + unsigned long wait;
> +
> + spin_unlock(&bdi_lock);
> + wait = msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_writeback_interval * 10);
> + schedule_timeout(wait);
> + try_to_freeze();
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> +
> + /*
> + * This is our real job - check for pending entries in
> + * bdi_pending_list, and create the tasks that got added
> + */
> + bdi = list_entry(bdi_pending_list.next, struct backing_dev_info,
> + bdi_list);
> + list_del_init(&bdi->bdi_list);
> + spin_unlock(&bdi_lock);
> +
> + BUG_ON(bdi->task);
> +
> + bdi->task = kthread_run(bdi_start_fn, bdi, "flush-%s",
> + dev_name(bdi->dev));
> + /*
> + * If task creation fails, then readd the bdi to
> + * the pending list and force writeout of the bdi
> + * from this forker thread. That will free some memory
> + * and we can try again.
> + */
> + if (IS_ERR(bdi->task)) {
> + bdi->task = NULL;
> +
> + /*
> + * Add this 'bdi' to the back, so we get
> + * a chance to flush other bdi's to free
> + * memory.
> + */
> + spin_lock(&bdi_lock);
> + list_add_tail(&bdi->bdi_list, &bdi_pending_list);
> + spin_unlock(&bdi_lock);
> +
> + bdi_flush_io(bdi);
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
chris.mason@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, hch@infradead.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz,
yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com, richard@rsk.demon.co.uk,
damien.wyart@free.fr, fweisbec@gmail.com, Alan.Brunelle@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushing data
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:27:09 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A53694D.2010905@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1245926523-21959-3-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Hi Jens, I've noticed the following _possible_ issue.
Jens Axboe wrote:
> +static int bdi_forker_task(void *ptr)
> +{
> + struct backing_dev_info *me = ptr;
> +
> + for (;;) {
> + struct backing_dev_info *bdi, *tmp;
> +
> + /*
> + * Temporary measure, we want to make sure we don't see
> + * dirty data on the default backing_dev_info
> + */
> + if (bdi_has_dirty_io(me))
> + bdi_flush_io(me);
> +
> + spin_lock(&bdi_lock);
> +
> + /*
> + * Check if any existing bdi's have dirty data without
> + * a thread registered. If so, set that up.
> + */
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(bdi, tmp, &bdi_list, bdi_list) {
> + if (bdi->task || !bdi_has_dirty_io(bdi))
> + continue;
> +
> + bdi_add_default_flusher_task(bdi);
> + }
> +
> + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> +
What happens if we are preempted here? Since we have TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
state, we will not come back unless some other task wakes us up. Who
would wake us up in this case?
> + if (list_empty(&bdi_pending_list)) {
> + unsigned long wait;
> +
> + spin_unlock(&bdi_lock);
> + wait = msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_writeback_interval * 10);
> + schedule_timeout(wait);
> + try_to_freeze();
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> +
> + /*
> + * This is our real job - check for pending entries in
> + * bdi_pending_list, and create the tasks that got added
> + */
> + bdi = list_entry(bdi_pending_list.next, struct backing_dev_info,
> + bdi_list);
> + list_del_init(&bdi->bdi_list);
> + spin_unlock(&bdi_lock);
> +
> + BUG_ON(bdi->task);
> +
> + bdi->task = kthread_run(bdi_start_fn, bdi, "flush-%s",
> + dev_name(bdi->dev));
> + /*
> + * If task creation fails, then readd the bdi to
> + * the pending list and force writeout of the bdi
> + * from this forker thread. That will free some memory
> + * and we can try again.
> + */
> + if (IS_ERR(bdi->task)) {
> + bdi->task = NULL;
> +
> + /*
> + * Add this 'bdi' to the back, so we get
> + * a chance to flush other bdi's to free
> + * memory.
> + */
> + spin_lock(&bdi_lock);
> + list_add_tail(&bdi->bdi_list, &bdi_pending_list);
> + spin_unlock(&bdi_lock);
> +
> + bdi_flush_io(bdi);
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-07 15:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-25 10:41 [PATCH 0/10] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v12 Jens Axboe
2009-06-25 10:41 ` [PATCH 01/10] writeback: move dirty inodes from super_block to backing_dev_info Jens Axboe
2009-06-25 10:41 ` [PATCH 02/10] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushing data Jens Axboe
2009-07-06 12:55 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-06 12:55 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-06 13:13 ` Jens Axboe
2009-07-06 13:26 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-06 13:26 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-07 15:27 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2009-07-07 15:27 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-08 0:57 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-07-08 4:47 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-08 4:47 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-06-25 10:41 ` [PATCH 03/10] writeback: get rid of pdflush completely Jens Axboe
2009-06-25 10:41 ` [PATCH 04/10] writeback: separate the flushing state/task from the bdi Jens Axboe
2009-06-25 10:41 ` [PATCH 05/10] writeback: support > 1 flusher thread per bdi Jens Axboe
2009-07-06 12:18 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-06 12:22 ` Jens Axboe
2009-07-06 13:37 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-06 13:49 ` Jamie Lokier
2009-07-06 14:11 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-06 14:11 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-06 15:43 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-25 10:41 ` [PATCH 06/10] writeback: allow sleepy exit of default writeback task Jens Axboe
2009-06-25 10:42 ` [PATCH 07/10] writeback: add some debug inode list counters to bdi stats Jens Axboe
2009-06-25 10:42 ` [PATCH 08/10] writeback: add name to backing_dev_info Jens Axboe
2009-06-25 10:42 ` [PATCH 09/10] writeback: check for registered bdi in flusher add and inode dirty Jens Axboe
2009-06-25 10:42 ` [PATCH 10/10] writeback: use spin_trylock() in bdi_writeback_all() for WB_SYNC_NONE Jens Axboe
2009-06-29 8:43 ` [PATCH 0/10] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v12 Zhang, Yanmin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-08-31 12:14 [PATCH 0/10] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v14 Jens Axboe
2009-08-31 12:14 ` [PATCH 02/10] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushing data Jens Axboe
2009-08-31 12:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-08-31 17:29 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-17 11:07 [PATCH 0/10] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v11 Jens Axboe
2009-06-17 11:07 ` [PATCH 02/10] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushing data Jens Axboe
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=4A53694D.2010905@gmail.com \
--to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=Alan.Brunelle@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=damien.wyart@free.fr \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richard@rsk.demon.co.uk \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.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.