From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>, Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>, Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] btrfs: use btrfs_bio_for_each_sector in btrfs_check_read_dio_bio
Date: Mon, 23 May 2022 08:07:01 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8a6fb996-64c3-63b3-7f9c-aec78e83504e@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220522125337.GB24032@lst.de>
On 2022/5/22 20:53, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2022 at 08:38:50PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>> 'cause now a lot of the bio works will depend on the read repair, and
>>> I don't want to block it on yet another series..
>>
>> Although I believe we will have to take more time on the read repair
>> code/functionality.
>>
>> Especially all our submitted version have their own problems.
>>
>> From the basic handling of checker pattern corruption, to the trade-off
>> between memory allocation and performance for read on corrupted data.
>
> I've already pushed out a new version here:
>
> http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/misc.git/shortlog/refs/heads/btrfs-read_repair
>
> so feel free to take a look. I just don't want to spam the list with it
> quite yet with this series outstanding.
I checked the code, but still find the code in patch "btrfs: add new
read repair infrastructure" not that instinctive.
- Why we bother different repair methods in btrfs_repair_one_mirror()?
In fact btrfs_repair_io_failure() can handle all profiles.
Then why we go back to write the whole bio?
The only reason I can think of is, we're still trying to do some
"optimization".
But all our bio submission is already synchronous, I doubt such
"optimization" would make much difference.
- The bio truncation
This really looks like a bandage to address the checker pattern
corruption.
I doubt why not just do per-sector read/write like:
+ /* Init read bio to contain that corrupted sector only */
+ for (i = get_next_mirror(init_mirror); i != init_mirror; i++) {
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = btrfs_map_bio_wait(inode, read_bio, i);
+ /* Failed to submit, try next mirror */
+ if (ret < 0)
+ continue;
+
+ /* Verify the checksum */
+ if (failed_bbio->csum)
+ ret = btrfs_check_data_sector(fs_info, page,
+ pgoff, repair_bbio->csum);
+ if (ret == 0) {
+ found_good = true;
+ btrfs_repair_io_failure();
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ if (!found_good)
+ return -EIO;
To me, the "optimization" of batched read/write is only relevant if we
have tons of corrupted sectors in a read bio, which I don't believe is a
hot path in real world anyway.
Thanks,
Qu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-23 0:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-22 11:47 misc btrfs cleanups Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-22 11:47 ` [PATCH 1/8] btrfs: quit early if the fs has no RAID56 support for raid56 related checks Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-22 11:47 ` [PATCH 2/8] btrfs: introduce a pure data checksum checking helper Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-23 0:38 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-24 7:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-24 8:07 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-24 8:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-25 16:20 ` David Sterba
2022-05-22 11:47 ` [PATCH 3/8] btrfs: remove duplicated parameters from submit_data_read_repair() Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-22 11:47 ` [PATCH 4/8] btrfs: factor out a helper to end a single sector buffere I/O Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-25 14:54 ` Nikolay Borisov
2022-05-22 11:47 ` [PATCH 5/8] btrfs: refactor end_bio_extent_readpage Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-25 14:57 ` Nikolay Borisov
2022-05-22 11:47 ` [PATCH 6/8] btrfs: factor out a btrfs_csum_ptr helper Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-25 14:32 ` Nikolay Borisov
2022-05-22 11:47 ` [PATCH 7/8] btrfs: add a helper to iterate through a btrfs_bio with sector sized chunks Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-26 12:58 ` Nikolay Borisov
2022-05-22 11:47 ` [PATCH 8/8] btrfs: use btrfs_bio_for_each_sector in btrfs_check_read_dio_bio Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-22 12:21 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-22 12:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-22 12:38 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-22 12:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-23 0:07 ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2022-05-23 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-23 7:46 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-24 7:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-24 8:04 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-24 8:21 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-24 12:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-24 13:13 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-24 14:02 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-25 15:12 ` Nikolay Borisov
2022-05-25 22:46 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-05-26 12:58 ` Nikolay Borisov
2022-05-25 20:20 ` misc btrfs cleanups David Sterba
2022-05-27 15:20 ` David Sterba
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=8a6fb996-64c3-63b3-7f9c-aec78e83504e@gmx.com \
--to=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@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