From: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: ext4 development <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: ext4 stable page writes question
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 19:01:32 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r4ijrbn7.fsf@openvz.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130409142805.GF13672@quack.suse.cz>
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 16:28:05 +0200, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> On Tue 09-04-13 17:38:21, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > According to stable write assumptions (1d1d1a767206fb)
> > grab_cache_page_write_begin() now calls relaxed method wait_for_stable_page()
> > which will wait for writeback to finish only if bdi demand that.
> Yes.
>
> > Commit message states that ext4 may not wait
> > But there are a lot of write-paths where we expect that:
> > BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page));
> > BUG_ON(PageWriteback(page));
> Really? The only places I can find are in writeback path and there we
> have wait_on_page_writeback() (either in write_cache_pages() or in
> ext4_da_writepages()).
>
> > And the only reason we avoid this bugon is because of commit 47564bfb95b
> > which use following trick to avoid lock inversion over journal_start:
> > page = grab_cache_page_write_begin()
> > unlock_page(page);
> > ext4_journal_start()
> > lock_page(page);
> > wait_on_page_writeback(page); <<<< unconditional wait
> No, I think this is really independent. ext4 should be fine when write &
> writeback are running in parallel for a page.
>
> > So as far as I understand this was done just by occasion because
> > ext4_page_mkwrite() use wait_for_stable_page().
> >
> > So here is my question: Do we have to wait for page's writeback to
> > finish for all write paths in ext4 code or we may use
> > wait_for_stable_page() and should cleanup all places where
> > we may trigger BUG_ON(PageWriteback(page));
> If there's any such place, please tell me how we could trigger it...
move_extent.c:mext_page_mkuptodate() expect that.
IMHO it is reasonable to force behavior here even if we may not do that
on other places because defragmentation code should be 101% reliable
and performance is not important here.
>
> Honza
> --
> Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> SUSE Labs, CR
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-09 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-09 13:38 ext4 stable page writes question Dmitry Monakhov
2013-04-09 14:28 ` Jan Kara
2013-04-09 15:01 ` Dmitry Monakhov [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=87r4ijrbn7.fsf@openvz.org \
--to=dmonakhov@openvz.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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