From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@linuxmail.org>
Cc: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Freeze bdevs when freezing processes.
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 11:08:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200610261108.23390.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1161850709.17293.23.camel@nigel.suspend2.net>
On Thursday, 26 October 2006 10:18, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi Dave.
>
> On Thu, 2006-10-26 at 17:30 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 09:05:56PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 25 October 2006 15:23, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, my impression is that this is exactly what happens here: Something
> > > > > in the XFS code causes metadata to be written to disk _after_ the atomic
> > > > > snapshot.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's why I asked if the dirty XFS metadata were flushed by a kernel thread.
> > > >
> > > > When I first added bdev freezing it was because there was an XFS timer
> > > > doing writes.
> > >
> > > Yes, I noticed you said that, but I'd like someone from the XFS team to either
> > > confirm or deny it.
> >
> > We have daemons running in the background that can definitely do stuff
> > after a sync. hmm - one does try_to_freeze() after a wakeup, the
> > other does:
> >
> > if (unlikely(freezing(current))) {
> > set_bit(XBT_FORCE_SLEEP, &target->bt_flags);
> > refrigerator();
> > } else {
> > clear_bit(XBT_FORCE_SLEEP, &target->bt_flags);
> > }
> >
> > before it goes to sleep. So that one (xfsbufd - metadata buffer flushing)
> > can definitely wake up after the sync and do work, and the other could if
> > the kernel thread freeze occurs after the sync.
> >
> > Another good question at this point - exactly how should we be putting
> > these thread to to sleep? Are both these valid methods for freezing them?
> > And should we be freezing when we wake up instead of before we go to
> > sleep? i.e. what are teh rules we are supposed to be following?
>
> As you have them at the moment, the threads seem to be freezing fine.
> The issue I've seen in the past related not to threads but to timer
> based activity. Admittedly it was 2.6.14 when I last looked at it, but
> there used to be a possibility for XFS to submit I/O from a timer when
> the threads are frozen but the bdev isn't frozen.
Also there may be a problem if a workqueue is used for that, because
worker_threads run with PF_NOFREEZE set.
Greetings,
Rafael
--
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
R. Buckminster Fuller
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-26 9:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1161576735.3466.7.camel@nigel.suspend2.net>
[not found] ` <200610231236.54317.rjw@sisk.pl>
2006-10-24 14:44 ` [PATCH] Freeze bdevs when freezing processes David Chinner
2006-10-24 15:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-24 16:27 ` Oleg Verych
2006-10-25 8:05 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-24 16:33 ` David Chinner
2006-10-24 21:37 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-25 0:13 ` David Chinner
2006-10-25 8:10 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-25 8:38 ` David Chinner
2006-10-25 8:47 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-25 12:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-25 13:23 ` Nigel Cunningham
[not found] ` <200610252105.56862.rjw@sisk.pl>
2006-10-26 7:30 ` David Chinner
2006-10-26 8:18 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-26 8:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-26 8:57 ` David Chinner
2006-10-26 9:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-27 1:38 ` David Chinner
2006-10-27 14:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-29 17:35 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] ` <200610300029.25555.rjw@sisk.pl>
2006-10-29 23:46 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-26 9:18 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-26 9:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2006-10-24 17:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-10-24 21:26 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-24 21:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-10-24 21:43 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-24 22:19 ` Nigel Cunningham
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=200610261108.23390.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dgc@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ncunningham@linuxmail.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--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