public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/3] xfs: run eofblocks scan on ENOSPC
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:52:27 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1400845950-41435-1-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> (raw)

Hi all,

Here's v2 of the eofblocks scan on ENOSPC series, incorporating feedback
from v1:

http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-03/msg00388.html

The major change here is to simplify the error checking logic and tie
the eofblocks scan to the inode flush in the ENOSPC scenario. I've done
some high-level testing that doesn't seem to elicit any sort of
pathological behavior given the circumstances (i.e., performance will
never be ideal as we head into ENOSPC).

I tested on a hacked filesystem that makes preallocation persistent (no
trim on close), disables preallocation throttling and set the background
scanner to a high value to create worst case conditions. I ran an
fs_mark workload to create 64k 1MB files. Then, started 16x8GB
sequential dd writers expected to hit ENOSPC. This is on a 16xcpu box
with 32GB RAM and a 200GB fs (with agcounts of 32 and 1024).

Via tracepoints, I generally observe that the inode flush acts as a
filter to prevent many threads from entering into eofblocks scans at
once. E.g., by the time the first handful of threads make it through a
scan, they and/or others have dirtied more data for the remaining queued
up inode flushers to work with. I notice some occasional spikes in
kworkers or rcu processing, but nothing for longer than a couple seconds
or so.

A downside I've noticed with this logic is that once one thread runs a
scan and makes it through this retry sequence, it has a better chance to
allocate more of the recently freed space than the others, all of which
might have queued on the inode flush lock by the time the first
flush/scan completes.

This leads to what one might consider "unfair" allocation across the set
of writers when we enter this scenario. E.g., I saw tests were some
threads were able to complete the 8GB write while others only made it to
2-3GB before the filesystem completely ran out of space. Given the
benefit of the series, I think this is something that can be potentially
enhanced incrementally if it turns out to be a problem in practice.

I also have an xfstests test I'm planning to post soon that verifies
lingering preallocations can be reclaimed in a reasonable manner before
returning ENOSPC.

Thoughts, reviews, flames appreciated.

Brian

v2:
- Drop flush mechanism during eofblocks scan (along with prereq patch).
- Simplify scan logic on ENOSPC. Separate EDQUOT from ENOSPC and tie
  ENOSPC scan to inode flush.
- Eliminate unnecessary project quota handling from
  xfs_inode_free_quota_eofblocks() (ENOSPC is a separate path).

Brian Foster (3):
  xfs: add scan owner field to xfs_eofblocks
  xfs: run an eofblocks scan on ENOSPC/EDQUOT
  xfs: squash prealloc while over quota free space as well

 fs/xfs/xfs_dquot.h  | 15 ++++++++++++++
 fs/xfs/xfs_file.c   | 23 +++++++++++++++++----
 fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c | 59 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 fs/xfs/xfs_icache.h |  3 +++
 fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c  | 20 ++++++++++++------
 5 files changed, 109 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

-- 
1.8.3.1

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

             reply	other threads:[~2014-05-23 11:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-23 11:52 Brian Foster [this message]
2014-05-23 11:52 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] xfs: add scan owner field to xfs_eofblocks Brian Foster
2014-05-26 22:49   ` Dave Chinner
2014-05-27 10:44   ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-05-27 12:18     ` Brian Foster
2014-05-27 21:26       ` Dave Chinner
2014-05-28  5:30         ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-05-28 14:00           ` Brian Foster
2014-05-23 11:52 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] xfs: run an eofblocks scan on ENOSPC/EDQUOT Brian Foster
2014-05-26 22:57   ` Dave Chinner
2014-05-27 12:47     ` Brian Foster
2014-05-27 21:14       ` Dave Chinner
2014-05-28 12:42         ` Brian Foster
2014-05-23 11:52 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] xfs: squash prealloc while over quota free space as well Brian Foster
2014-05-26 23:00   ` Dave Chinner

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=1400845950-41435-1-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com \
    --to=bfoster@redhat.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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