From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Liz Fong-Jones <lizf@honeycomb.io>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
"Patrick Lu (Anthropic)" <perf.patrick.lu@gmail.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ian@honeycomb.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: keep cleanup_offline_cgwb()'s scan out of syncs
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 11:28:24 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <29b280c82730b879e5f3ccdb35639ead@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261015114307.1041273-1-lizf@honeycomb.io>
Hello, Liz.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2026 at 11:43:09AM +0000, Liz Fong-Jones wrote:
> Trigger: a wb has lazytime-dirty inodes on b_dirty_time when a sync
> starts, an inode on it gets a timestamp update after the sync's cutoff,
> and then its memcg (or, if the wb is already dying, any memcg) is
> removed, which runs cleanup_offline_cgwb() on it before the sync work
> queues inodes.
The late inode has to be one without a pending lazytime update. One
already on b_dirty_time keeps its position and dirtied_when.
cleanup_offline_cgwbs_workfn() skips wbs with anything on b_dirty, b_io
or b_more_io. So the scan has to land between wb_writeback() fixing
dirtied_before and taking list_lock for the first queue_io(), which is a
few instructions. The exception is a multi-pass drain that started
before the wb got dirty IO, as the loop doesn't recheck. Maybe say that
the window is narrow so that stable can weigh it?
> Once an isw fills before the scan reaches a newer inode, or a later pass
> walks past it, older inodes land in front of it on b_dirty_time.
A pass keeps the inodes it walks in order, so the only reordering is
between the walked inodes and the ones a filled pass didn't reach. "or a
later pass walks past it" doesn't seem to be a separate case.
> Tejun spotted this reordering racing with a sync on b_dirty in a patch
> under review and suggested holding wb_switch_rwsem for read across that
> scan [1]. cleanup_offline_cgwb()'s scan of b_dirty_time needs the same.
The description is pretty long for a six-line fix. Maybe drop this
paragraph, which Suggested-by and Link already cover, move the test
details below ---, and tighten the rest?
> + /*
> + * The scan reorders b_dirty_time. Keep it out of a sync's way, which
> + * could otherwise miss timestamps moved past its cutoff.
> + */
The inodes' dirtied_when doesn't change. What moves is their list
position. Maybe something like:
/*
* The scan moves walked inodes to the newest end of b_dirty_time,
* past ones it didn't reach. If one of those was dirtied after a
* sync's cutoff, the sync's queue_io() stops there and misses the
* moved ones. Exclude syncs as process_inode_switch_wbs() does.
*/
None of the above is blocking.
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-16 21:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-15 11:43 [PATCH] writeback: keep cleanup_offline_cgwb()'s scan out of syncs Liz Fong-Jones
2026-10-16 21:28 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2026-10-17 4:07 ` [PATCH v2] " Liz Fong-Jones
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=29b280c82730b879e5f3ccdb35639ead@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ian@honeycomb.io \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@honeycomb.io \
--cc=perf.patrick.lu@gmail.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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