Re: [PATCH 04/11] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushing data

[Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>]

On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 11:41 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:

> +	if (writeback_acquire(bdi)) {
> +		bdi->wb_arg.nr_pages = nr_pages;
> +		bdi->wb_arg.sb = sb;
> +		bdi->wb_arg.sync_mode = sync_mode;
> +		/*
> +		 * make above store seen before the task is woken
> +		 */
> +		smp_mb();
> +		wake_up(&bdi->wait);
> +	}

wake_up() implies a wmb() when we indeed to a wakeup, is that
sufficient?

> +int bdi_writeback_task(struct backing_dev_info *bdi)
> +{
> +	while (!kthread_should_stop()) {
> +		unsigned long wait_jiffies;
> +		DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> +
> +		prepare_to_wait(&bdi->wait, &wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> +		wait_jiffies = msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_writeback_interval * 10);
> +		schedule_timeout(wait_jiffies);
> +		try_to_freeze();
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * We get here in two cases:
> +		 *
> +		 *  schedule_timeout() returned because the dirty writeback
> +		 *  interval has elapsed. If that happens, we will be able
> +		 *  to acquire the writeback lock and will proceed to do
> +		 *  kupdated style writeout.
> +		 *
> +		 *  Someone called bdi_start_writeback(), which will acquire
> +		 *  the writeback lock. This means our writeback_acquire()
> +		 *  below will fail and we call into bdi_pdflush() for
> +		 *  pdflush style writeout.
> +		 *
> +		 */
> +		if (writeback_acquire(bdi))
> +			bdi_kupdated(bdi);
> +		else
> +			bdi_pdflush(bdi);
> +
> +		writeback_release(bdi);
> +		finish_wait(&bdi->wait, &wait);
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

the unpaired writeback_release() wrt writeback_acquire() looks odd.

Also the prepare/finish wait bits seem oddly out of place. Are there
really multiple waiters on bdi->wait? The above wake_up() seems to
suggest not, since it directly modifies bdi state instead of queueing
work.