From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/3] f2fs: run GCs synchronously given user requests
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 11:17:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YrtFtkD4FZ1ILzzI@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bba33935-1e5f-ccc4-9bbf-2ebf7d136bac@kernel.org>
On 06/28, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2022/6/23 0:58, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 06/22, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > On 2022/6/20 6:34, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > On 06/19, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > > On 2022/6/18 6:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > > > When users set GC_URGENT or GC_MID, they expected to do GCs right away.
> > > > > > But, there's a condition to bypass it. Let's indicate we need to do now
> > > > > > in the thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > .should_migrate_blocks is used to force migrating blocks in full
> > > > > section, so what is the condition here? GC should not never select
> > > > > a full section, right?
> > > >
> > > > I think it'll move a full section given .victim_segno is not NULL_SEGNO,
> > > > as __get_victim will give a dirty segment all the time. wdyt?
> > >
> > > However, in gc_thread_fun() victim_segno is NULL_SEGNO all the time.
> >
> > What do you mean? The gc_thread thread sets NULL_SEGNO, which prevents
> > from selecting the full section. But, f2fs_ioc_flush_device will set the
> > segno to move, and f2fs_resize_fs calls do_garbage_collect directly.
>
> Yes, but I didn't get why this patch updates .should_migrate_blocks for
> gc_thread_func() case? If this is added to avoid breaking from below condition,
> I guess it's not necessary, since victim selected from gc_thread_func() will
> always be dirty, so get_valid_blocks(sbi, segno, true) == BLKS_PER_SEC(sbi)
> will be false anyway? or am I missing something?
I lost the previous test. :( IIRC, once I set GC_URGENT_HIGH, I've seen that
f2fs_gc couldn't migrate blocks quickly, even or never succeeded. And, I
also suspected the below condition tho, if I give force_migrate, it
simply worked. I just realized that that may be caused by large sections
having non-2MB-aligned zone capacity. Will check it again, as I found
some buggy flows in that case.
>
> /*
> * stop BG_GC if there is not enough free sections.
> * Or, stop GC if the segment becomes fully valid caused by
> * race condition along with SSR block allocation.
> */
> if ((gc_type == BG_GC && has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, 0, 0)) ||
> (!force_migrate && get_valid_blocks(sbi, segno, true) ==
> BLKS_PER_SEC(sbi)))
> return submitted;
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > >
> > > I guess .should_migrate_blocks should only be set to true for
> > > F2FS_IOC_FLUSH_DEVICE/F2FS_IOC_RESIZE_FS case? rather than GC_URGENT or GC_MID
> > > case? See commit 7dede88659df ("f2fs: fix to allow migrating fully valid segment").
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > fs/f2fs/gc.c | 8 ++++++--
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> > > > > > index d5fb426e0747..f4aa3c88118b 100644
> > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> > > > > > @@ -37,7 +37,6 @@ static int gc_thread_func(void *data)
> > > > > > unsigned int wait_ms;
> > > > > > struct f2fs_gc_control gc_control = {
> > > > > > .victim_segno = NULL_SEGNO,
> > > > > > - .should_migrate_blocks = false,
> > > > > > .err_gc_skipped = false };
> > > > > > wait_ms = gc_th->min_sleep_time;
> > > > > > @@ -113,7 +112,10 @@ static int gc_thread_func(void *data)
> > > > > > sbi->gc_mode == GC_URGENT_MID) {
> > > > > > wait_ms = gc_th->urgent_sleep_time;
> > > > > > f2fs_down_write(&sbi->gc_lock);
> > > > > > + gc_control.should_migrate_blocks = true;
> > > > > > goto do_gc;
> > > > > > + } else {
> > > > > > + gc_control.should_migrate_blocks = false;
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > if (foreground) {
> > > > > > @@ -139,7 +141,9 @@ static int gc_thread_func(void *data)
> > > > > > if (!foreground)
> > > > > > stat_inc_bggc_count(sbi->stat_info);
> > > > > > - sync_mode = F2FS_OPTION(sbi).bggc_mode == BGGC_MODE_SYNC;
> > > > > > + sync_mode = F2FS_OPTION(sbi).bggc_mode == BGGC_MODE_SYNC ||
> > > > > > + sbi->gc_mode == GC_URGENT_HIGH ||
> > > > > > + sbi->gc_mode == GC_URGENT_MID;
> > > > > > /* foreground GC was been triggered via f2fs_balance_fs() */
> > > > > > if (foreground)
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/3] f2fs: run GCs synchronously given user requests
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 11:17:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YrtFtkD4FZ1ILzzI@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bba33935-1e5f-ccc4-9bbf-2ebf7d136bac@kernel.org>
On 06/28, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2022/6/23 0:58, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 06/22, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > On 2022/6/20 6:34, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > On 06/19, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > > On 2022/6/18 6:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > > > When users set GC_URGENT or GC_MID, they expected to do GCs right away.
> > > > > > But, there's a condition to bypass it. Let's indicate we need to do now
> > > > > > in the thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > .should_migrate_blocks is used to force migrating blocks in full
> > > > > section, so what is the condition here? GC should not never select
> > > > > a full section, right?
> > > >
> > > > I think it'll move a full section given .victim_segno is not NULL_SEGNO,
> > > > as __get_victim will give a dirty segment all the time. wdyt?
> > >
> > > However, in gc_thread_fun() victim_segno is NULL_SEGNO all the time.
> >
> > What do you mean? The gc_thread thread sets NULL_SEGNO, which prevents
> > from selecting the full section. But, f2fs_ioc_flush_device will set the
> > segno to move, and f2fs_resize_fs calls do_garbage_collect directly.
>
> Yes, but I didn't get why this patch updates .should_migrate_blocks for
> gc_thread_func() case? If this is added to avoid breaking from below condition,
> I guess it's not necessary, since victim selected from gc_thread_func() will
> always be dirty, so get_valid_blocks(sbi, segno, true) == BLKS_PER_SEC(sbi)
> will be false anyway? or am I missing something?
I lost the previous test. :( IIRC, once I set GC_URGENT_HIGH, I've seen that
f2fs_gc couldn't migrate blocks quickly, even or never succeeded. And, I
also suspected the below condition tho, if I give force_migrate, it
simply worked. I just realized that that may be caused by large sections
having non-2MB-aligned zone capacity. Will check it again, as I found
some buggy flows in that case.
>
> /*
> * stop BG_GC if there is not enough free sections.
> * Or, stop GC if the segment becomes fully valid caused by
> * race condition along with SSR block allocation.
> */
> if ((gc_type == BG_GC && has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, 0, 0)) ||
> (!force_migrate && get_valid_blocks(sbi, segno, true) ==
> BLKS_PER_SEC(sbi)))
> return submitted;
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > >
> > > I guess .should_migrate_blocks should only be set to true for
> > > F2FS_IOC_FLUSH_DEVICE/F2FS_IOC_RESIZE_FS case? rather than GC_URGENT or GC_MID
> > > case? See commit 7dede88659df ("f2fs: fix to allow migrating fully valid segment").
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > fs/f2fs/gc.c | 8 ++++++--
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> > > > > > index d5fb426e0747..f4aa3c88118b 100644
> > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> > > > > > @@ -37,7 +37,6 @@ static int gc_thread_func(void *data)
> > > > > > unsigned int wait_ms;
> > > > > > struct f2fs_gc_control gc_control = {
> > > > > > .victim_segno = NULL_SEGNO,
> > > > > > - .should_migrate_blocks = false,
> > > > > > .err_gc_skipped = false };
> > > > > > wait_ms = gc_th->min_sleep_time;
> > > > > > @@ -113,7 +112,10 @@ static int gc_thread_func(void *data)
> > > > > > sbi->gc_mode == GC_URGENT_MID) {
> > > > > > wait_ms = gc_th->urgent_sleep_time;
> > > > > > f2fs_down_write(&sbi->gc_lock);
> > > > > > + gc_control.should_migrate_blocks = true;
> > > > > > goto do_gc;
> > > > > > + } else {
> > > > > > + gc_control.should_migrate_blocks = false;
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > if (foreground) {
> > > > > > @@ -139,7 +141,9 @@ static int gc_thread_func(void *data)
> > > > > > if (!foreground)
> > > > > > stat_inc_bggc_count(sbi->stat_info);
> > > > > > - sync_mode = F2FS_OPTION(sbi).bggc_mode == BGGC_MODE_SYNC;
> > > > > > + sync_mode = F2FS_OPTION(sbi).bggc_mode == BGGC_MODE_SYNC ||
> > > > > > + sbi->gc_mode == GC_URGENT_HIGH ||
> > > > > > + sbi->gc_mode == GC_URGENT_MID;
> > > > > > /* foreground GC was been triggered via f2fs_balance_fs() */
> > > > > > if (foreground)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-28 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-17 22:31 [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] f2fs: attach inline_data after setting compression Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-17 22:31 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-17 22:31 ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/3] f2fs: run GCs synchronously given user requests Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-17 22:31 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-19 0:41 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu
2022-06-19 0:41 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-19 22:34 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-19 22:34 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-22 14:02 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-22 14:02 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-22 16:58 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-22 16:58 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-28 7:59 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-28 7:59 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-28 18:17 ` Jaegeuk Kim [this message]
2022-06-28 18:17 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-29 16:30 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-29 16:30 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-17 22:31 ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 3/3] f2fs: do not skip updating inode when retrying to flush node page Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-17 22:31 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-19 0:54 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu
2022-06-19 0:54 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-19 0:35 ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] f2fs: attach inline_data after setting compression Chao Yu
2022-06-19 0:35 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-22 14:06 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-22 14:06 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-22 16:52 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-22 16:52 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-22 16:53 ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3 v2] " Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-22 16:53 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2022-06-28 7:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu
2022-06-28 7:46 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-28 7:50 ` Chao Yu
2022-06-28 7:50 ` Chao Yu
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=YrtFtkD4FZ1ILzzI@google.com \
--to=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=chao@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.