From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCHv6 10/15] writeback: move bdi threads exiting logic to the forker thread
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 14:29:20 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1280057365-10297-11-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1280057365-10297-1-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com>
From: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
Currently, bdi threads can decide to exit if there were no useful activities
for 5 minutes. However, this causes nasty races: we can easily oops in the
'bdi_queue_work()' if the bdi thread decides to exit while we are waking it up.
And even if we do not oops, but the bdi tread exits immediately after we wake
it up, we'd lose the wake-up event and have an unnecessary delay (up to 5 secs)
in the bdi work processing.
This patch makes the forker thread to be the central place which not only
creates bdi threads, but also kills them if they were inactive long enough.
This better design-wise.
Another reason why this change was done is to prepare for the further changes
which will prevent the bdi threads from waking up every 5 sec and wasting
power. Indeed, when the task does not wake up periodically anymore, it won't be
able to exit either.
This patch also moves the the 'wake_up_bit()' call from the bdi thread to the
forker thread as well. So now the forker thread sets the BDI_pending bit, then
forks the task or kills it, then clears the bit and wakes up the waiting
process.
The only process which may wain on the bit is 'bdi_wb_shutdown()'. This
function was changed as well - now it first removes the bdi from the
'bdi_list', then waits on the 'BDI_pending' bit. Once it wakes up, it is
guaranteed that the forker thread won't race with it, because the bdi is not
visible. Note, the forker thread sets the 'BDI_pending' bit under the
'bdi->wb_lock' which is essential for proper serialization.
And additionally, when we change 'bdi->wb.task', we now take the
'bdi->work_lock', to make sure that we do not lose wake-ups which we otherwise
would when raced with, say, 'bdi_queue_work()'.
Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
---
fs/fs-writeback.c | 54 +++++++++--------------------------------
mm/backing-dev.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
2 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
index 53e1028..b9e5ba0 100644
--- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
+++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
@@ -78,21 +78,17 @@ static void bdi_queue_work(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
spin_lock(&bdi->wb_lock);
list_add_tail(&work->list, &bdi->work_list);
- spin_unlock(&bdi->wb_lock);
-
- /*
- * If the default thread isn't there, make sure we add it. When
- * it gets created and wakes up, we'll run this work.
- */
- if (unlikely(!bdi->wb.task)) {
+ if (bdi->wb.task) {
+ wake_up_process(bdi->wb.task);
+ } else {
+ /*
+ * The bdi thread isn't there, wake up the forker thread which
+ * will create and run it.
+ */
trace_writeback_nothread(bdi, work);
wake_up_process(default_backing_dev_info.wb.task);
- } else {
- struct bdi_writeback *wb = &bdi->wb;
-
- if (wb->task)
- wake_up_process(wb->task);
}
+ spin_unlock(&bdi->wb_lock);
}
static void
@@ -800,7 +796,6 @@ int bdi_writeback_thread(void *data)
{
struct bdi_writeback *wb = data;
struct backing_dev_info *bdi = wb->bdi;
- unsigned long wait_jiffies = -1UL;
long pages_written;
current->flags |= PF_FLUSHER | PF_SWAPWRITE;
@@ -812,13 +807,6 @@ int bdi_writeback_thread(void *data)
*/
set_user_nice(current, 0);
- /*
- * Clear pending bit and wakeup anybody waiting to tear us down
- */
- clear_bit(BDI_pending, &bdi->state);
- smp_mb__after_clear_bit();
- wake_up_bit(&bdi->state, BDI_pending);
-
trace_writeback_thread_start(bdi);
while (!kthread_should_stop()) {
@@ -828,18 +816,6 @@ int bdi_writeback_thread(void *data)
if (pages_written)
wb->last_active = jiffies;
- else if (wait_jiffies != -1UL) {
- unsigned long max_idle;
-
- /*
- * Longest period of inactivity that we tolerate. If we
- * see dirty data again later, the thread will get
- * recreated automatically.
- */
- max_idle = max(5UL * 60 * HZ, wait_jiffies);
- if (time_after(jiffies, max_idle + wb->last_active))
- break;
- }
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
if (!list_empty(&bdi->work_list)) {
@@ -847,21 +823,15 @@ int bdi_writeback_thread(void *data)
continue;
}
- if (dirty_writeback_interval) {
- wait_jiffies = msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_writeback_interval * 10);
- schedule_timeout(wait_jiffies);
- } else
+ if (dirty_writeback_interval)
+ schedule_timeout(msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_writeback_interval * 10));
+ else
schedule();
try_to_freeze();
}
- wb->task = NULL;
-
- /*
- * Flush any work that raced with us exiting. No new work
- * will be added, since this bdi isn't discoverable anymore.
- */
+ /* Flush any work that raced with us exiting */
if (!list_empty(&bdi->work_list))
wb_do_writeback(wb, 1);
diff --git a/mm/backing-dev.c b/mm/backing-dev.c
index e104e32..9c1c199 100644
--- a/mm/backing-dev.c
+++ b/mm/backing-dev.c
@@ -316,6 +316,18 @@ static void sync_supers_timer_fn(unsigned long unused)
bdi_arm_supers_timer();
}
+/*
+ * Calculate the longest interval (jiffies) bdi threads are allowed to be
+ * inactive.
+ */
+static unsigned long bdi_longest_inactive(void)
+{
+ unsigned long interval;
+
+ interval = msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_writeback_interval * 10);
+ return max(5UL * 60 * HZ, interval);
+}
+
static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
{
struct bdi_writeback *me = ptr;
@@ -329,11 +341,12 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
set_user_nice(current, 0);
for (;;) {
- struct task_struct *task;
+ struct task_struct *task = NULL;
struct backing_dev_info *bdi;
enum {
NO_ACTION, /* Nothing to do */
FORK_THREAD, /* Fork bdi thread */
+ KILL_THREAD, /* Kill inactive bdi thread */
} action = NO_ACTION;
/*
@@ -346,10 +359,6 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
spin_lock_bh(&bdi_lock);
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
- /*
- * Check if any existing bdi's have dirty data without
- * a thread registered. If so, set that up.
- */
list_for_each_entry(bdi, &bdi_list, bdi_list) {
bool have_dirty_io;
@@ -376,6 +385,25 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
action = FORK_THREAD;
break;
}
+
+ spin_lock(&bdi->wb_lock);
+ /*
+ * If there is no work to do and the bdi thread was
+ * inactive long enough - kill it. The wb_lock is taken
+ * to make sure no-one adds more work to this bdi and
+ * wakes the bdi thread up.
+ */
+ if (bdi->wb.task && !have_dirty_io &&
+ time_after(jiffies, bdi->wb.last_active +
+ bdi_longest_inactive())) {
+ task = bdi->wb.task;
+ bdi->wb.task = NULL;
+ spin_unlock(&bdi->wb_lock);
+ set_bit(BDI_pending, &bdi->state);
+ action = KILL_THREAD;
+ break;
+ }
+ spin_unlock(&bdi->wb_lock);
}
spin_unlock_bh(&bdi_lock);
@@ -394,8 +422,20 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
* the bdi from the thread.
*/
bdi_flush_io(bdi);
- } else
+ } else {
+ /*
+ * The spinlock makes sure we do not lose
+ * wake-ups when racing with 'bdi_queue_work()'.
+ */
+ spin_lock(&bdi->wb_lock);
bdi->wb.task = task;
+ spin_unlock(&bdi->wb_lock);
+ }
+ break;
+
+ case KILL_THREAD:
+ __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
+ kthread_stop(task);
break;
case NO_ACTION:
@@ -407,6 +447,13 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
/* Back to the main loop */
continue;
}
+
+ /*
+ * Clear pending bit and wakeup anybody waiting to tear us down.
+ */
+ clear_bit(BDI_pending, &bdi->state);
+ smp_mb__after_clear_bit();
+ wake_up_bit(&bdi->state, BDI_pending);
}
return 0;
@@ -490,15 +537,15 @@ static void bdi_wb_shutdown(struct backing_dev_info *bdi)
return;
/*
- * If setup is pending, wait for that to complete first
+ * Make sure nobody finds us on the bdi_list anymore
*/
- wait_on_bit(&bdi->state, BDI_pending, bdi_sched_wait,
- TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
+ bdi_remove_from_list(bdi);
/*
- * Make sure nobody finds us on the bdi_list anymore
+ * If setup is pending, wait for that to complete first
*/
- bdi_remove_from_list(bdi);
+ wait_on_bit(&bdi->state, BDI_pending, bdi_sched_wait,
+ TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
/*
* Finally, kill the kernel thread. We don't need to be RCU
--
1.7.1.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-25 11:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-25 11:29 [PATCHv6 00/15] kill unnecessary bdi wakeups + cleanups Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 01/15] writeback: harmonize writeback threads naming Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 02/15] writeback: fix possible race when creating bdi threads Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 03/15] writeback: do not lose wake-ups in the forker thread - 1 Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 04/15] writeback: do not lose wake-ups in the forker thread - 2 Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 05/15] writeback: do not lose wake-ups in bdi threads Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 06/15] writeback: simplify bdi code a little Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 07/15] writeback: do not remove bdi from bdi_list Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 08/15] writeback: move last_active to bdi Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 09/15] writeback: restructure bdi forker loop a little Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 11/15] writeback: prevent unnecessary bdi threads wakeups Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 12/15] writeback: optimize periodic bdi thread wakeups Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 13/15] writeback: remove unnecessary init_timer call Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 14/15] writeback: add new tracepoints Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-25 11:29 ` [PATCHv6 15/15] writeback: cleanup bdi_register Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-03 4:44 ` [PATCHv6 00/15] kill unnecessary bdi wakeups + cleanups Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-03 12:27 ` Jens Axboe
2010-08-03 12:37 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-03 12:47 ` Jens Axboe
2010-08-04 11:34 ` Jens Axboe
2010-08-05 9:35 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-03 14:11 ` Artem Bityutskiy
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=1280057365-10297-11-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com \
--to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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).