From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] writeback: check skipped pages on WB_SYNC_ALL
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:16:27 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101109231627.GA8348@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101109144728.d405453d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 06:47:28AM +0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 07:09:21 +0800
> Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > In WB_SYNC_ALL mode, filesystems are not expected to skip dirty pages on
> > temporal lock contentions or non fatal errors, otherwise sync() will
> > return without actually syncing the skipped pages. Add a check to
> > catch possible redirty_page_for_writepage() callers that violate this
> > expectation.
> >
> > I'd recommend to keep this check in -mm tree for some time and fixup the
> > possible warnings before pushing it to upstream.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> > ---
> > fs/fs-writeback.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > --- linux-next.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c 2010-11-07 22:01:06.000000000 +0800
> > +++ linux-next/fs/fs-writeback.c 2010-11-07 22:01:15.000000000 +0800
> > @@ -527,6 +527,7 @@ static int writeback_sb_inodes(struct su
> > * buffers. Skip this inode for now.
> > */
> > redirty_tail(inode);
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_ALL);
> > }
> > spin_unlock(&inode_lock);
> > iput(inode);
>
> This is quite kernel-developer-unfriendly.
>
> Suppose the warning triggers. Now some poor schmuck looks at the
> warning and doesn't have a *clue* why it was added. He has to run off
> and grovel through git trees finding changelogs, which is a real pain
> if the code has been trivially altered since it was first added.
>
> As a general rule, a kernel developer should be able to look at a
> warning callsite and then work out why the warning was emitted!
>
>
> IOW, you owe us a code comment, please.
Good point!
I'll add this comment.
+ /*
+ * There's no logic to retry skipped pages for sync(),
+ * filesystems are assumed not to skip dirty pages on
+ * temporal lock contentions or non fatal errors.
+ */
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_ALL);
IOW, if some FS triggers this warning and it's non-trivial to fix the
FS, we'll have to work out a sync retry scheme for skipped pages.
Thanks,
Fengguang
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-09 23:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-08 23:09 [PATCH 0/5] writeback livelock fixes Wu Fengguang
2010-11-08 23:09 ` [PATCH 1/5] writeback: integrated background writeback work Wu Fengguang
2010-11-08 23:09 ` [PATCH 2/5] writeback: trace wakeup event for background writeback Wu Fengguang
2010-11-08 23:09 ` [PATCH 3/5] writeback: stop background/kupdate works from livelocking other works Wu Fengguang
2010-11-09 21:13 ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-09 22:28 ` Jan Kara
2010-11-09 23:00 ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-09 23:56 ` Jan Kara
2010-11-10 23:37 ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-11 0:40 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-11-11 13:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-11 16:44 ` Jan Kara
2010-11-08 23:09 ` [PATCH 4/5] writeback: avoid livelocking WB_SYNC_ALL writeback Wu Fengguang
2010-11-09 22:43 ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-09 23:18 ` Jan Kara
2010-11-10 2:26 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-11-08 23:09 ` [PATCH 5/5] writeback: check skipped pages on WB_SYNC_ALL Wu Fengguang
2010-11-09 22:47 ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-09 23:16 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2010-11-08 23:23 ` [PATCH 0/5] writeback livelock fixes Wu Fengguang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-11-10 2:35 [PATCH 0/5] writeback livelock fixes v2 Wu Fengguang
2010-11-10 2:35 ` [PATCH 5/5] writeback: check skipped pages on WB_SYNC_ALL Wu Fengguang
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=20101109231627.GA8348@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.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).