From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/2] btrfs: defrag: bring back the old file extent search behavior and address merged extent map generation problem
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 14:36:29 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cover.1644301903.git.wqu@suse.com> (raw)
Filipe reported that the old defrag code using btrfs_search_forward() to
do the following optimization:
- Don't cache extent maps
To save memory in the long run
- Skip entire file ranges which doesn't meet generation requirement
- Don't use merged extent maps which will have unreliable geneartion
The first patch will bring back the old behavior, along with the old
optimizations.
However the 3rd problem is not that easy to solve, as data
read/readahead can also load extent maps into the cache, and causing
extent maps being merged.
Such already cached and merged extent maps will still confuse autodefrag,
as if we found cached extent maps, we will not try to read them from
disk again.
So to completely prevent merged extent maps tricking autodefrag, here
comes the 2nd patch, to mark merged extent maps for defrag.
If we hit an merged extent, and its generation meets our requirement, we
will not trust it but read from disk to get a reliable generation.
This should reduce defrag IO caused by the hidden extent map merging
behavior.
Changelog:
v2:
- Make defrag_get_em() to be more flexiable to handle file extent
iteartion
Now it will not reject item key which is smaller than our target but
doesn't have the wanted type/objectid.
It will continue go next next instead, to prevent skipping an extent.
- Properly reduce path.slots[0]
There is a bug where I want to put "if (path.slots[0] == 0)" but I put
"if (btrfs_header_nritems(path.slots[0]))".
This is fixed with reworked file extent iteration code.
- Address merged extent maps properly
With fixed defrag_get_extent(), we can rely on it to get original em
from disk.
So what we need to do is just to ignore merged extents which meets
our generation requirement.
Qu Wenruo (2):
btrfs: defrag: bring back the old file extent search behavior
btrfs: defrag: don't use merged extent map for their generation check
fs/btrfs/extent_map.c | 2 +
fs/btrfs/extent_map.h | 8 +++
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 164 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
3 files changed, 170 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--
2.35.0
next reply other threads:[~2022-02-08 6:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-08 6:36 Qu Wenruo [this message]
2022-02-08 6:36 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] btrfs: defrag: bring back the old file extent search behavior Qu Wenruo
2022-02-09 15:35 ` Filipe Manana
2022-02-08 6:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] btrfs: defrag: don't use merged extent map for their generation check Qu Wenruo
2022-02-09 15:46 ` Filipe Manana
2022-02-10 0:40 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-02-10 15:49 ` Filipe Manana
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=cover.1644301903.git.wqu@suse.com \
--to=wqu@suse.com \
--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