public inbox for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jth@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
	Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] btrfs: be less verbose on automatic bg reclaim
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2025 09:01:32 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250708160057.GA2659713@zen.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250708065504.63525-1-jth@kernel.org>

On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 08:55:01AM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> From: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
> 
> BTRFS filesystems with active automatic block-group reclaim (this
> especially hits zoned file systems where automatic block-group reclaim is
> used for garbage collection) do a lot of log spamming, because every
> relocated block group is accompanied by three prints at info level.
> 
> The first patch removes the info message that is only present with
> automatic block group reclaim, we have a tracepoint right next to it so
> there's no need for the message at all.
> 
> The second patch introduces a `verbose` parameter for
> `btrfs_relocate_chunk()` and `btrfs_relocate_block_group()` to control if
> we want to add printks or not. Automatic reclaim calls into
> `btrfs_relocate_chunk()` setting `verbose` to false while the user-space
> triggered balance code path sets `verbose` to true retaining the old
> behaviour. 

We also struggle with the spam at Meta with automatic reclaim enabled
though quite a bit less with dynamic.. :) In particular, users often
think it means there is some kind of btrfs error happening.

This looks like a good compromise to me, and I'd be quite happy to see
it go in.

Reviewed-by: Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>

Thanks!

> 
> Johannes Thumshirn (2):
>   btrfs: remove redundant auto reclaim log message
>   btrfs: don't print relocation messages from auto reclaim
> 
>  fs/btrfs/block-group.c |  8 +-------
>  fs/btrfs/relocation.c  | 12 ++++++++----
>  fs/btrfs/relocation.h  |  3 ++-
>  fs/btrfs/volumes.c     | 14 ++++++++------
>  fs/btrfs/volumes.h     |  3 ++-
>  5 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.50.0
> 

      parent reply	other threads:[~2025-07-08 16:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-08  6:55 [PATCH 0/2] btrfs: be less verbose on automatic bg reclaim Johannes Thumshirn
2025-07-08  6:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] btrfs: remove redundant auto reclaim log message Johannes Thumshirn
2025-07-08  6:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: don't print relocation messages from auto reclaim Johannes Thumshirn
2025-07-08 16:01 ` Boris Burkov [this message]

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=20250708160057.GA2659713@zen.localdomain \
    --to=boris@bur.io \
    --cc=johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com \
    --cc=jth@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox