From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
chris.mason@oracle.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] xfs: convert ENOSPC inode flushing to use new syncd workqueue
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 07:40:18 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110304124018.GA29062@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110303224105.GP15097@dastard>
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 09:41:05AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 10:34:10AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > I still don't see any point in having the ENOSPC flushing moved to a
> > different context.
>
> IIRC, stack usage has always been an issue, and we also call
> xfs_flush_inodes() with the XFS_IOLOCK held (from
> xfs_iomap_write_delay()) so the alternate context was used to avoid
> deadlocks. I don't think we have that deadlock problem now thanks to
> being able to combine SYNC_TRYLOCK | SYNC_WAIT flags, but I'm not
> sure we can ignore the stack issues.
Given that we wait for completion of the syncing in the caller moving it
to a different context does not help with any deadlocks. It just makes
them impossible to detect using lockdep.
> I've also realised the work_pending() check is unnecessary, as is
> the lock, because queue_work() will only queue new work if the work
> item isn't already pending so there's no need to check it here.
> Hence all this actually needs to do is:
>
> queue_work()
> flush_work_sync()
or in fact only use the writeback_inodes_sb_if_idle call you added
later. That also causes writeback of data from the flusher threads.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-04 12:37 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
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 [this message]
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=20110304124018.GA29062@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.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