From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>, David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
clm@fb.com, josef@toxicpanda.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.15 12/24] btrfs: scrub: try harder to mark RAID56 block groups read-only
Date: Wed, 31 May 2023 09:43:08 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230531134320.3384102-12-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230531134320.3384102-1-sashal@kernel.org>
From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
[ Upstream commit 7561551e7ba870b9659083b95feb520fb2dacce3 ]
Currently we allow a block group not to be marked read-only for scrub.
But for RAID56 block groups if we require the block group to be
read-only, then we're allowed to use cached content from scrub stripe to
reduce unnecessary RAID56 reads.
So this patch would:
- Make btrfs_inc_block_group_ro() try harder
During my tests, for cases like btrfs/061 and btrfs/064, we can hit
ENOSPC from btrfs_inc_block_group_ro() calls during scrub.
The reason is if we only have one single data chunk, and trying to
scrub it, we won't have any space left for any newer data writes.
But this check should be done by the caller, especially for scrub
cases we only temporarily mark the chunk read-only.
And newer data writes would always try to allocate a new data chunk
when needed.
- Return error for scrub if we failed to mark a RAID56 chunk read-only
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 9 ++++++++-
2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
index 19f71c305b988..a76796f153d5f 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
@@ -2576,10 +2576,20 @@ int btrfs_inc_block_group_ro(struct btrfs_block_group *cache,
}
ret = inc_block_group_ro(cache, 0);
- if (!do_chunk_alloc || ret == -ETXTBSY)
- goto unlock_out;
if (!ret)
goto out;
+ if (ret == -ETXTBSY)
+ goto unlock_out;
+
+ /*
+ * Skip chunk alloction if the bg is SYSTEM, this is to avoid system
+ * chunk allocation storm to exhaust the system chunk array. Otherwise
+ * we still want to try our best to mark the block group read-only.
+ */
+ if (!do_chunk_alloc && ret == -ENOSPC &&
+ (cache->flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_SYSTEM))
+ goto unlock_out;
+
alloc_flags = btrfs_get_alloc_profile(fs_info, cache->space_info->flags);
ret = btrfs_chunk_alloc(trans, alloc_flags, CHUNK_ALLOC_FORCE);
if (ret < 0)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
index ca8d6979c7887..0d1715ebdef9c 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
@@ -3812,13 +3812,20 @@ int scrub_enumerate_chunks(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
if (ret == 0) {
ro_set = 1;
- } else if (ret == -ENOSPC && !sctx->is_dev_replace) {
+ } else if (ret == -ENOSPC && !sctx->is_dev_replace &&
+ !(cache->flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID56_MASK)) {
/*
* btrfs_inc_block_group_ro return -ENOSPC when it
* failed in creating new chunk for metadata.
* It is not a problem for scrub, because
* metadata are always cowed, and our scrub paused
* commit_transactions.
+ *
+ * For RAID56 chunks, we have to mark them read-only
+ * for scrub, as later we would use our own cache
+ * out of RAID56 realm.
+ * Thus we want the RAID56 bg to be marked RO to
+ * prevent RMW from screwing up out cache.
*/
ro_set = 0;
} else if (ret == -ETXTBSY) {
--
2.39.2
next parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-31 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20230531134320.3384102-1-sashal@kernel.org>
2023-05-31 13:43 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2023-05-31 13:43 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.15 13/24] btrfs: handle memory allocation failure in btrfs_csum_one_bio Sasha Levin
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=20230531134320.3384102-12-sashal@kernel.org \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wqu@suse.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox