linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] writeback: avoid redirtying when ->write_inode failed to clear I_DIRTY
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:24:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111020232414.GD20542@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111020153705.882281372@intel.com>

On Thu 20-10-11 23:22:42, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
> 
> Right now ->write_inode has no way to safely return a EAGAIN without explicitly
> redirtying the inode, as we would lose the dirty state otherwise.  Most
> filesystems get this wrong, but XFS makes heavy use of it to avoid blocking
> the flusher thread when ->write_inode hits contentended inode locks.  A
> contended ilock is something XFS can hit very easibly when extending files, as
> the data I/O completion handler takes the lock to update the size, and the
> ->write_inode call can race with it fairly easily if writing enough data
> in one go so that the completion for the first write come in just before
> we call ->write_inode.
> 
> Change the handling of this case to use requeue_io_wait for a quick retry instead
> of redirty_tail, which keeps moving out the dirtied_when data and thus keeps
> delaying the writeout more and more with every failed attempt to get the lock.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
  You can add:
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

								Honza

> ---
>  fs/fs-writeback.c |   12 +++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> --- linux-next.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c	2011-10-08 13:30:25.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-next/fs/fs-writeback.c	2011-10-08 13:30:41.000000000 +0800
> @@ -488,8 +488,18 @@ writeback_single_inode(struct inode *ino
>  			 * operations, such as delayed allocation during
>  			 * submission or metadata updates after data IO
>  			 * completion.
> +			 *
> +			 * For the latter case it is very important to give
> +			 * the inode another turn on b_more_io instead of
> +			 * redirtying it.  Constantly moving dirtied_when
> +			 * forward will prevent us from ever writing out
> +			 * the metadata dirtied in the I/O completion handler.
> +			 *
> +			 * For files on XFS that constantly get appended to
> +			 * calling redirty_tail means they will never get
> +			 * their updated i_size written out.
>  			 */
> -			redirty_tail(inode, wb);
> +			requeue_io_wait(inode, wb);
>  		} else {
>  			/*
>  			 * The inode is clean.  At this point we either have
> 
> 
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

  reply	other threads:[~2011-10-20 23:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-20 15:22 [PATCH 0/7] writeback: avoid touching dirtied_when on blocked inodes Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 1/7] writeback: introduce queue b_more_io_wait Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 23:23   ` Jan Kara
2011-10-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 2/7] writeback: avoid redirtying when ->write_inode failed to clear I_DIRTY Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 23:24   ` Jan Kara [this message]
2011-10-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 3/7] writeback: update wb->last_active on written pages/inodes Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 4/7] writeback: Retry kupdate work early if we need to retry some inode writeback Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 5/7] writeback: requeue_io_wait() on pages_skipped inode Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 23:25   ` Jan Kara
2011-10-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 6/7] writeback: requeue_io_wait() on blocked inode Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 23:31   ` Jan Kara
2011-10-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 7/7] writeback: requeue_io_wait() when failed to grab superblock Wu Fengguang
2011-10-20 23:25   ` Jan Kara
2011-10-20 23:21 ` [PATCH 0/7] writeback: avoid touching dirtied_when on blocked inodes Jan Kara
2011-10-21 10:40   ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-21 19:54     ` Jan Kara
2011-10-22  3:11       ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-22  5:38         ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-22  6:59           ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-22  7:07             ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-22  7:46           ` Wu Fengguang
2011-10-22  4:46 ` 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=20111020232414.GD20542@quack.suse.cz \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --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).