From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: "Tang, Feng" <feng.tang@intel.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] jbd2: avoid the concurrent data writeback
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:54:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101115055420.GA21785@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1289827533-2576-1-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com>
[add CC to mailing lists]
Tang,
Good catch!
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:25:33PM +0800, Tang, Feng wrote:
> When dd a big file to an ext4 partition, it is very likely to happen
> that both the background flush thread and kjounald try to do data
> writeback for it, and ext4_witepage may be called 100, 000 times by
> journal_submit_inode_data_buffers() without really writing one page
> back (skipped), as those pages haven't had disk blocks allocated yet.
The above changelog could show a bit more details (to help me
understand it :).
Does it happen frequently and hence has measurable overheads?
Is it safe to skip the inode? Another alternative is to wait for it:
with inode_wait_for_writeback(inode).
> This could be find by a simple test case with ftrace:
> $ sync;
> $ echo 40960 > buffer_size_kb;echo 1 > events/writeback/enable;echo 1 > events/jbd2/enable;echo 1 > events/ext4/enable;
> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/test/1g.bin bs=1M count=1024;sync;
> $ cat trace > /home/test/jbd2_ext4_1g_dd.log
>
> This patch will check if the inode is under data syncing, if yes then
> don't start the writeback from kjournald
>
> Signed-off-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
> ---
> fs/jbd2/commit.c | 8 ++++++++
> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/jbd2/commit.c b/fs/jbd2/commit.c
> index f3ad159..8a1978d 100644
> --- a/fs/jbd2/commit.c
> +++ b/fs/jbd2/commit.c
> @@ -181,6 +181,14 @@ static int journal_submit_inode_data_buffers(struct address_space *mapping)
> .range_end = i_size_read(mapping->host),
> };
>
> + spin_lock(&inode_lock);
> + /* If this inode is under data syncing, then just quit */
Comments should go above the whole code block. And the above comment
does not really say anything. Say something *why* code like this
rather than *what* the code is doing.
> + if (mapping->host->i_state & I_SYNC) {
> + spin_unlock(&inode_lock);
> + return 0;
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&inode_lock);
> +
> ret = generic_writepages(mapping, &wbc);
> return ret;
> }
Thanks,
Fengguang
next parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-15 5:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1289827533-2576-1-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com>
2010-11-15 5:54 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2010-11-15 9:59 ` [PATCH] jbd2: avoid the concurrent data writeback Feng Tang
2010-11-15 11:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-16 8:13 ` Feng Tang
2010-11-16 12:13 ` Jan Kara
2010-11-17 1:36 ` Feng Tang
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=20101115055420.GA21785@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--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).