From: David Arendt <admin-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
To: Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-nilfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: cleaner: run one cleaning pass based on minimum free space
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:17:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BAF48BC.8060505@prnet.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100328.105542.258871713.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 9728 bytes --]
Hi,
here the nogc patch
As changelog description for this one, we could put:
add mount option to disable garbage collection
Thanks in advance
Bye,
David Arendt
On 03/28/10 03:55, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 21:00:52 +0100, David Arendt <admin-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> here the revised version of the patch
>>
>> As changelog description we could put:
>>
>> add options for cleaning based on number of free segments
>>
> Thanks.
>
> Ok, it looks fine to me.
>
>
>> In order to pass different config files to cleaner while not increasing
>> mount options, another solution might be adding a mount option
>> nocleanerd to disable staring of cleanerd. I know, there is mount -i,
>> but this option would have the advantage that it could be used in
>> /etc/fstab. In this way, cleaner could be started manually with whatever
>> options are needed. What would you think about it ?
>>
> Agreed.
>
> Maybe name of the mount option should be "nocleaner" or "nogc" because
> "nocleanerd" implies how it is implemented.
>
>
>> Anyway I think this should be part of a second patch as it is
>> implementing different functionality.
>>
> Yes, it should be separate from the first one.
>
> Thanks,
> Ryusuke Konishi
>
>
>> On 03/27/10 18:48, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
>>
>>> Hi David,
>>> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 06:35:00 +0100, David Arendt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> just for completeness, here is a re-post of the complete patch using
>>>> cleanerd->c_running instead of local variable "sleeping".
>>>>
>>>> Bye,
>>>> David Arendt
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Sorry for my late response.
>>>
>>> I'm planning to apply your patch.
>>>
>>> The patch looks reducible some more, for example, the preparation:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> + if (cleanerd->c_config.cf_min_clean_segments > 0) {
>>>> + syslog(LOG_INFO, "cleaner paused");
>>>> + cleanerd->c_running = 0;
>>>> + timeout.tv_sec = cleanerd->c_config.cf_clean_check_interval;
>>>> + timeout.tv_nsec = 0;
>>>> + }
>>>> + else
>>>> + cleanerd->c_running = 1;
>>>> +
>>>>
>>>>
>>> can be simplified as follows:
>>>
>>> if (cleanerd->c_config.cf_min_clean_segments == 0)
>>> cleanerd->c_running = 1;
>>>
>>> And, the status control using cleanerd->c_running seems to have room
>>> for improvement. Except for these trivial matters, your change looks
>>> simple but effective, and is flawlessly keeping compatibility.
>>>
>>> If you have a revised patch, please send me for merge. Also, I would
>>> appreciate it if you could write some changelog description.
>>>
>>> Thank you in advance,
>>> Ryusuke Konishi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 03/17/10 19:11, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:24:28 +0100, David Arendt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well I didn't know that a few days can pass as fast :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have attached the patch to this mail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Until now the patch has only been shortly tested on a loop device, so it
>>>>>> might contain bugs and destroy your data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for posting the patch!
>>>>>
>>>>> The patch looks rougly ok to me.
>>>>> I'll comment on it later.
>>>>>
>>>>> At first glance, I felt it would be nice if cleanerd->c_running is
>>>>> nicely used instead of adding a local variable "sleeping".
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Ryusuke Konishi
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you decide to apply it, please change the default values to the ones
>>>>>> you find the most appropriate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>>> Bye,
>>>>>> David Arendt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03/15/10 16:58, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 00:03:45 +0100, David Arendt wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am posting this again to the correct mailing list as I cc'ed it to the
>>>>>>>> old inactive one.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe I am understanding something wrong, but if I would use the count
>>>>>>>> of reclaimed segments, how could I determine if one cleaning pass has
>>>>>>>> finished as I don't know in advance how many segments could be reclaimed ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example, how about this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> nmax = (number of segments) - (number of clean segments)
>>>>>>> nblk = (max_clean_segments - (number of clean segments)) *
>>>>>>> (number of blocks per segment)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * If (number of clean segments) < min_clean_segments, then start reclamation
>>>>>>> * Try to reclaim nmax segments (at a maximum).
>>>>>>> * When the cleaner found and freed nblk blocks during the
>>>>>>> reclamation, then end one cleaning pass.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Another approach would be not basing cleaning on a whole cleaning pass
>>>>>>>> but instead creating these addtional configfile options:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> # start cleaning if less than 100 free segments
>>>>>>>> min_clean_segments 100
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> # stop cleaning if more than 200 free segments
>>>>>>>> max_clean_segments 200
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> # check free space once an hour
>>>>>>>> segment_check_interval 3600
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Basically in this example if less than 800mb are free cleaner is run
>>>>>>>> until 1600mb are free. If min_clean_segments is 0, the cleaner would do
>>>>>>>> normal operation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The first two parameters look Ok.
>>>>>>> (I've already referred to these in the above example.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We may well be able to make segment_check_interval more frequent.
>>>>>>> or do you have something in mind?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you mean interval of cleaning passes ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For this solution only changes in configfile loading and
>>>>>>>> nilfs_cleanerd_clean_loop would be necessary which would lower the risk
>>>>>>>> of introducing new bugs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If this solution is ok for you, I will implement it this way and send
>>>>>>>> you the patch in a few days. Also tell me if the names I have choosen
>>>>>>>> for the options are ok for you or if you would prefer other ones.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The option names look fine to me.
>>>>>>> Or should we use percentage for them?
>>>>>>> (number of segments is device dependent)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there anything else that isn't clear?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>>>>> Bye,
>>>>>>>> David Arendt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Ryusuke Konishi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 03/14/10 15:28, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:00:19 +0100, admin-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I will try to implement this myself then. Concerning the
>>>>>>>>>> nilfs_cleanerd_select segments function I was unclear in my post. In
>>>>>>>>>> fact I did not mean the return value but the first element from the
>>>>>>>>>> segnums array.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ok. So you thought of determining termination of one cleaning pass by
>>>>>>>>> the segment number stored preliminarily.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why not just use count of processed (i.e. reclaimed) segments?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Note that it's not guranteed that segments are selected in the order
>>>>>>>>> of segment number though this premise looks almost right.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It depends on the behavior of segment allocator and the current
>>>>>>>>> "Select-oldest" algorithm used behind
>>>>>>>>> nilfs_cleanerd_select_segments(). Nilfs log writer occasionally
>>>>>>>>> behaves differently and disturbs this order.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think you can ignore the exceptional behavior of the segment
>>>>>>>>> allocator, and rotate target segments with skipping free or mostly
>>>>>>>>> in-use ones. In that case, nilfs_cleanerd_select_segments() should be
>>>>>>>>> modified to select segments in the order of segment number.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Ryusuke Konishi
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in
>>>>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
>>>>>>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>
>>>
>>
[-- Attachment #2: nilfs2-utils-nogc.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3338 bytes --]
diff -ur nilfs2-utils.orig/man/mount.nilfs2.8 nilfs2-utils/man/mount.nilfs2.8
--- nilfs2-utils.orig/man/mount.nilfs2.8 2010-03-14 15:11:30.916690347 +0100
+++ nilfs2-utils/man/mount.nilfs2.8 2010-03-28 12:16:49.785942470 +0200
@@ -108,6 +108,11 @@
elapsed time from its creation is smaller than
\fIprotection-period\fP.
.TP
+.BR nogc
+Disable garbage collection. The cleaner daemon will not be started.
+It can be be started manually, but in that case it must also be
+stopped manually before unmounting.
+.TP
.BR order=relaxed " / " order=strict
Specify order semantics for file data. Metadata is always written to
follow the POSIX semantics about the order of filesystem operations.
diff -ur nilfs2-utils.orig/sbin/mount/mount.nilfs2.c nilfs2-utils/sbin/mount/mount.nilfs2.c
--- nilfs2-utils.orig/sbin/mount/mount.nilfs2.c 2010-03-14 15:11:30.918691251 +0100
+++ nilfs2-utils/sbin/mount/mount.nilfs2.c 2010-03-28 14:05:28.861362988 +0200
@@ -74,6 +74,9 @@
const char pp_opt_fmt[] = PPOPT_NAME "=%lu";
typedef unsigned long pp_opt_t;
+const char nogc_opt_fmt[] = NOGCOPT_NAME;
+typedef int nogc_opt_t;
+
struct mount_options {
char *fstype;
char *opts;
@@ -329,6 +332,7 @@
int type;
int mounted;
pp_opt_t protperiod;
+ nogc_opt_t nogc;
};
static int check_mtab(void)
@@ -391,6 +395,8 @@
if (find_opt(mc->m.mnt_opts, pp_opt_fmt, &prot_period) >= 0)
mi->protperiod = prot_period;
+ mi->nogc = (find_opt(mc->m.mnt_opts, nogc_opt_fmt, NULL) >= 0);
+
switch (mo->flags & (MS_RDONLY | MS_REMOUNT)) {
case 0: /* overlapping rw-mount */
error(_("%s: the device already has a rw-mount on %s."
@@ -426,11 +432,13 @@
static int
do_mount_one(struct nilfs_mount_info *mi, const struct mount_options *mo)
{
- int res, errsv;
- char *exopts;
+ int res, errsv, mtab_ok;
+ char *tmpexopts, *exopts;
pp_opt_t prot_period;
- exopts = change_opt(mo->extra_opts, pp_opt_fmt, &prot_period, "");
+ tmpexopts = change_opt(mo->extra_opts, pp_opt_fmt, &prot_period, "");
+ exopts = change_opt(tmpexopts, nogc_opt_fmt, NULL, "");
+ my_free(tmpexopts);
res = mount(mi->device, mi->mntdir, fstype, mo->flags & ~MS_NOSYS,
exopts);
@@ -450,9 +458,12 @@
}
if (mi->type != RW2RO_REMOUNT && mi->type != RW2RW_REMOUNT)
goto out;
+
+ mtab_ok = check_mtab();
+
/* Cleaner daemon was stopped and it needs to run */
/* because filesystem is still mounted */
- if (check_mtab()) {
+ if (!mi->nogc && mtab_ok) {
/* Restarting cleaner daemon */
if (start_cleanerd(mi->device, mi->mntdir, mi->protperiod,
&mi->gcpid) == 0) {
@@ -481,7 +492,7 @@
char *exopts;
int rungc;
- rungc = !(mo->flags & MS_RDONLY) && !(mo->flags & MS_BIND);
+ rungc = (find_opt(mo->extra_opts, nogc_opt_fmt, NULL) < 0) && !(mo->flags & MS_RDONLY) && !(mo->flags & MS_BIND);
if (!check_mtab()) {
if (rungc)
diff -ur nilfs2-utils.orig/sbin/mount/mount.nilfs2.h nilfs2-utils/sbin/mount/mount.nilfs2.h
--- nilfs2-utils.orig/sbin/mount/mount.nilfs2.h 2010-03-14 15:11:30.918691251 +0100
+++ nilfs2-utils/sbin/mount/mount.nilfs2.h 2010-03-28 11:05:38.717647856 +0200
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#define CLEANERD_NAME "nilfs_cleanerd"
#define PIDOPT_NAME "gcpid"
#define PPOPT_NAME "pp"
+#define NOGCOPT_NAME "nogc"
#define CLEANERD_WAIT_RETRY_COUNT 3
#define CLEANERD_WAIT_RETRY_INTERVAL 2 /* in seconds */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-28 12:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-14 13:00 cleaner: run one cleaning pass based on minimum free space admin-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg
[not found] ` <hSSjxhQnnRB5.kxy725KN-GG6YVgmNXeLOQU1ULcgDhA@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-14 14:28 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100314.232838.05854811.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-14 23:03 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4B9D6B51.5010202-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-15 15:58 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100316.005815.140047502.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-15 17:09 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4B9E69D2.4030803-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-17 17:26 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2010-03-15 21:24 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4B9EA58C.1080402-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-17 18:11 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100318.031108.204325310.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-17 19:04 ` David Arendt
2010-03-24 5:35 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4BA9A484.20809-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-27 17:48 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100328.024853.37589748.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-27 18:32 ` David Arendt
2010-03-27 20:00 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4BAE63F4.1040404-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-28 1:55 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100328.105542.258871713.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-28 12:17 ` David Arendt [this message]
[not found] ` <4BAF48BC.8060505-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-28 15:26 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100329.002619.67908494.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-28 21:52 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4BAFCFB4.5050401-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-29 3:59 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100329.125908.56566467.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-29 4:35 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4BB02E0F.90001-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-29 7:39 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100329.163902.263795283.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-05 3:02 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100405.120226.98047309.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-05 7:50 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4BB99633.1030701-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-05 11:34 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100405.203450.56374807.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-05 13:35 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4BB9E726.8020407-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-06 16:06 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100407.010609.179957904.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-06 17:41 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4BBB724D.6040207-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-06 18:04 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100407.030446.52169610.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-07 10:39 ` admin-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg
[not found] ` <0f70f9c8a2d58971d6d6af5104c73066.squirrel-YfwCgBv0H3oBXFe83j6qeQ@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-08 5:12 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100408.141218.179775797.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-08 10:54 ` admin-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg
2010-04-06 16:12 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <y2gee5afd761004050430gd8c60707s9505a0d680345fe6@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <y2gee5afd761004050430gd8c60707s9505a0d680345fe6-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-05 12:35 ` Jan de Kruyf
[not found] ` <l2wee5afd761004050535l6214e37dja6f20737865dd856-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-06 17:56 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2010-03-16 11:17 ` admin-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg
[not found] ` <08886d8962faeee94a5ab900a2a78ad2.squirrel-YfwCgBv0H3oBXFe83j6qeQ@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-17 18:32 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100318.033237.203922438.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-17 19:12 ` David Arendt
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-03-13 20:49 David Arendt
[not found] ` <4B9BFA67.1010501-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-14 5:26 ` Ryusuke Konishi
[not found] ` <20100314.142634.172547823.ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-14 8:47 ` David Arendt
[not found] ` <4B9CA2BB.6000907-/LHdS3kC8BfYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-14 11:59 ` Ryusuke Konishi
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=4BAF48BC.8060505@prnet.org \
--to=admin-/lhds3kc8bfytjvyw6ydsg@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-nilfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=ryusuke-sG5X7nlA6pw@public.gmane.org \
/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.