From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: chris.mason@oracle.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] xfs: introduce inode cluster buffer trylocks for xfs_iflush
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:04:44 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110303220444.GN15097@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110303155535.GA12670@infradead.org>
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 10:55:35AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > + * pass through will see the stale flag set on the inode.
> > + */
> > + error = xfs_iflush(ip, SYNC_TRYLOCK | sync_mode);
> > if (sync_mode & SYNC_WAIT) {
> > + if (error == EAGAIN) {
> > + xfs_iunlock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
> > + /* backoff longer than in xfs_ifree_cluster */
> > + delay(2);
>
> Do we really need the delay here? It seems like we'd rather want to
> keep going with scanning the next inode cluster and return here from
> xfs_reclaim_inodes.
I did that because SYNC_WAIT semantics mean "block until the inode
is reclaimed". This is the slow, reliable reclaim path that doesn't
return until the inode is reclaimed, so we have to have a backoff
here to allow xfs_ifree_cluster() to complete it's backoff and gain
the locks successfully thereby allowing the inode to be reclaimed
successfully.
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.h b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.h
> > index 32ba662..0ae48ff 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.h
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.h
> > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ typedef struct xfs_sync_work {
> >
> > int xfs_syncd_init(struct xfs_mount *mp);
> > void xfs_syncd_stop(struct xfs_mount *mp);
> > +void xfs_syncd_queue_sync(struct xfs_mount *mp, int flags);
>
> This hunk belongs into a different patch.
Oops. Will fix.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-03 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-22 22:16 [RFC, PATCH 0/5] xfs: Reduce OOM kill problems under heavy load Dave Chinner
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 1/5] xfs: introduce inode cluster buffer trylocks for xfs_iflush Dave Chinner
2011-03-03 15:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 22:04 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 2/5] xfs: introduce a xfssyncd workqueue Dave Chinner
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 3/5] xfs: convert ENOSPC inode flushing to use new syncd workqueue Dave Chinner
2011-03-03 15:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 22:41 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-04 12:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 4/5] xfs: introduce background inode reclaim work Dave Chinner
2011-03-03 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 22:43 ` Dave Chinner
2011-02-22 22:16 ` [PATCH 5/5] xfs: kick inode writeback when low on memory Dave Chinner
2011-03-02 3:06 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-02 14:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 2:42 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-03 15:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-03 16:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-09 5:46 ` 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=20110303220444.GN15097@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--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