public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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