From: Sun YangKai <sunk67188@gmail.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Sun YangKai <sunk67188@gmail.com>, Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>
Subject: [PATCH v4 1/2] btrfs: fix periodic reclaim condition
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2026 11:47:02 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260114035126.20095-2-sunk67188@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260114035126.20095-1-sunk67188@gmail.com>
Problems with current implementation:
1. reclaimable_bytes is signed while chunk_sz is unsigned, causing
negative reclaimable_bytes to trigger reclaim unexpectedly
2. The "space must be freed between scans" assumption breaks the
two-scan requirement: first scan marks block groups, second scan
reclaims them. Without the second scan, no reclamation occurs.
Instead, track actual reclaim progress: pause reclaim when block groups
will be reclaimed, and resume only when progress is made. This ensures
reclaim continues until no further progress can be made. And resume
perioidc reclaim when there's enough free space.
And we take care if reclaim is making any progress now, so it's
unnecessary to set periodic_reclaim_ready to false when failed to reclaim
a blockgroup.
Fixes: 813d4c6422516 ("btrfs: prevent pathological periodic reclaim loops")
Suggested-by: Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>
Reviewed-by: Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>
Signed-off-by: Sun YangKai <sunk67188@gmail.com>
---
fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 6 ++++--
fs/btrfs/space-info.c | 21 ++++++++++++---------
2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
index e417aba4c4c7..79d86b233dda 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
@@ -1871,6 +1871,7 @@ void btrfs_reclaim_bgs_work(struct work_struct *work)
while (!list_empty(&fs_info->reclaim_bgs)) {
u64 used;
u64 reserved;
+ u64 old_total;
int ret = 0;
bg = list_first_entry(&fs_info->reclaim_bgs,
@@ -1936,6 +1937,7 @@ void btrfs_reclaim_bgs_work(struct work_struct *work)
}
spin_unlock(&bg->lock);
+ old_total = space_info->total_bytes;
spin_unlock(&space_info->lock);
/*
@@ -1988,14 +1990,14 @@ void btrfs_reclaim_bgs_work(struct work_struct *work)
reserved = 0;
spin_lock(&space_info->lock);
space_info->reclaim_errors++;
- if (READ_ONCE(space_info->periodic_reclaim))
- space_info->periodic_reclaim_ready = false;
spin_unlock(&space_info->lock);
}
spin_lock(&space_info->lock);
space_info->reclaim_count++;
space_info->reclaim_bytes += used;
space_info->reclaim_bytes += reserved;
+ if (space_info->total_bytes < old_total)
+ btrfs_set_periodic_reclaim_ready(space_info, true);
spin_unlock(&space_info->lock);
next:
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/space-info.c b/fs/btrfs/space-info.c
index 7b7b7255f7d8..7d2386ea86c5 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/space-info.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/space-info.c
@@ -2079,11 +2079,11 @@ static bool is_reclaim_urgent(struct btrfs_space_info *space_info)
return unalloc < data_chunk_size;
}
-static void do_reclaim_sweep(struct btrfs_space_info *space_info, int raid)
+static bool do_reclaim_sweep(struct btrfs_space_info *space_info, int raid)
{
struct btrfs_block_group *bg;
int thresh_pct;
- bool try_again = true;
+ bool will_reclaim = false;
bool urgent;
spin_lock(&space_info->lock);
@@ -2101,7 +2101,7 @@ static void do_reclaim_sweep(struct btrfs_space_info *space_info, int raid)
spin_lock(&bg->lock);
thresh = mult_perc(bg->length, thresh_pct);
if (bg->used < thresh && bg->reclaim_mark) {
- try_again = false;
+ will_reclaim = true;
reclaim = true;
}
bg->reclaim_mark++;
@@ -2118,12 +2118,13 @@ static void do_reclaim_sweep(struct btrfs_space_info *space_info, int raid)
* If we have any staler groups, we don't touch the fresher ones, but if we
* really need a block group, do take a fresh one.
*/
- if (try_again && urgent) {
- try_again = false;
+ if (!will_reclaim && urgent) {
+ urgent = false;
goto again;
}
up_read(&space_info->groups_sem);
+ return will_reclaim;
}
void btrfs_space_info_update_reclaimable(struct btrfs_space_info *space_info, s64 bytes)
@@ -2133,7 +2134,8 @@ void btrfs_space_info_update_reclaimable(struct btrfs_space_info *space_info, s6
lockdep_assert_held(&space_info->lock);
space_info->reclaimable_bytes += bytes;
- if (space_info->reclaimable_bytes >= chunk_sz)
+ if (space_info->reclaimable_bytes > 0 &&
+ space_info->reclaimable_bytes >= chunk_sz)
btrfs_set_periodic_reclaim_ready(space_info, true);
}
@@ -2160,7 +2162,6 @@ static bool btrfs_should_periodic_reclaim(struct btrfs_space_info *space_info)
spin_lock(&space_info->lock);
ret = space_info->periodic_reclaim_ready;
- btrfs_set_periodic_reclaim_ready(space_info, false);
spin_unlock(&space_info->lock);
return ret;
@@ -2174,8 +2175,10 @@ void btrfs_reclaim_sweep(const struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
list_for_each_entry(space_info, &fs_info->space_info, list) {
if (!btrfs_should_periodic_reclaim(space_info))
continue;
- for (raid = 0; raid < BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES; raid++)
- do_reclaim_sweep(space_info, raid);
+ for (raid = 0; raid < BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES; raid++) {
+ if (do_reclaim_sweep(space_info, raid))
+ btrfs_set_periodic_reclaim_ready(space_info, false);
+ }
}
}
--
2.52.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-14 3:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-14 3:47 [PATCH v4 0/2] btrfs: fix periodic reclaim condition Sun YangKai
2026-01-14 3:47 ` Sun YangKai [this message]
2026-02-08 18:24 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] " Chris Mason
2026-02-09 13:08 ` Sun YangKai
2026-02-09 13:14 ` Sun YangKai
2026-01-14 3:47 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] btrfs: consolidate reclaim readiness checks in btrfs_should_reclaim() Sun YangKai
2026-01-14 11:16 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2026-01-21 1:36 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] btrfs: fix periodic reclaim condition Boris Burkov
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=20260114035126.20095-2-sunk67188@gmail.com \
--to=sunk67188@gmail.com \
--cc=boris@bur.io \
--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