linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Kurt Miller <kurt@intricatesoftware.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Block device flush ordering
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 09:42:44 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190113224244.GC4205@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1547130601.20294.152.camel@intricatesoftware.com>

[ cc'd linux-block@vger.kernel.org, where questions about block
device behaviour are better directed. ]

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 09:30:01AM -0500, Kurt Miller wrote:
> For a well behaved block device that has a writeback cache,
> what is the proper behavior of flush when there are more
> then one outstanding flush operations? Is it;
> 
> Flush all writes seen since the last flush.
> or
> Flush all writes received prior to the flush including
> those before any prior flush.
> 
> For example take the following order of requests presented
> to the block device:
> 
> 	writes 1-5
> 	flush 1
> 	write 6
> 	flush 2
> 
> Can flush 2 finish with success as soon as write 6 is flushed
> (which may be before flush 1 success)? Or must it wait for
> all prior write operations to flush (writes 1-6)?

Don't take what I say as gospel, but according to block/blk-flush.c:

.....
 * Currently, the following conditions are used to determine when to issue
 * flush.
 *
 * C1. At any given time, only one flush shall be in progress.  This makes
 *     double buffering sufficient.
.....

However, flushes can be deferred and re-ordered vs other non-flush
write IO dispatch. As such, the rules we work to with filesystems is
that a flush only guarantees IO that is already completed will be
written to stable storage.  i.e. the filesystem has to wait for IO
completion of a write IO it needs to be stable before it can issue
(and wait for) a flush that will guarantee that it is on stable
storage.

IOWs, if your above scenario is:

	submit writes 1-5
	flush 1
	submit write 6
	writes 1,3,5 complete
	flush 2
	writes 2,4,6 complete

Then flush 1 does not guarantee any of the writes are on stable
storage. They *may* be on stable storage if the timing is right, but
it is not guaranteed by the OS code. Likewise, flush 2 only
guarantees writes 1, 3 and 5 are on stable storage becase they are
the only writes that have been signalled as complete when flush 2
was submitted.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-01-13 22:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-10 14:30 Block device flush ordering Kurt Miller
2019-01-11  9:24 ` Stefan Ring
2019-01-12  0:30   ` Kurt Miller
2019-01-13 22:42 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2019-01-14 16:45   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-01-15 14:35     ` Kurt Miller

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=20190113224244.GC4205@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=kurt@intricatesoftware.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).