From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>, Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: Fix overallocation in xfs_buf_allocate_memory()
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 23:28:52 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120605132852.GB22848@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1338894490-12662-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:08:10PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Commit 0e6e847f which introduced xfs_buf_allocate_memory() function has a bug
> causing the function to overestimate the number of necessary pages.
I don't think that commit is responsible at all - bp->b_bn was not
used at all originally - it was bp->b_file_offset that was used.
> The problem
> is that xfs_buf_alloc() sets b_bn to -1
Right, and the change that was made in commit de1cbee (xfs: kill
b_file_offset) changed that bp->b_file_offset to bp->b_bn, and that
is where the bug was introduced. This means it's only been present
in mainline since the 3.5-rc1 XFS merge....
> and thus effectively every buffer is
> straddling a page boundary which causes xfs_buf_allocate_memory() to allocate
> two pages and use vmalloc() for access which slows things down.
I did not notice this at all - it didn't cause me any problems or
slowdowns that I could measure in any benchmark I ran, so I'm
interested to know how you found it/noticed it....
> Fix the code to use correct block number.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c | 7 ++++---
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
> index 172d3cc..b67cc83 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
> @@ -296,6 +296,7 @@ xfs_buf_free(
> STATIC int
> xfs_buf_allocate_memory(
> xfs_buf_t *bp,
> + xfs_daddr_t blkno,
> uint flags)
> {
> size_t size;
> @@ -334,8 +335,8 @@ xfs_buf_allocate_memory(
> }
>
> use_alloc_page:
> - start = BBTOB(bp->b_bn) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> - end = (BBTOB(bp->b_bn + bp->b_length) + PAGE_SIZE - 1) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> + start = BBTOB(blkno) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> + end = (BBTOB(blkno + bp->b_length) + PAGE_SIZE - 1) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> page_count = end - start;
> error = _xfs_buf_get_pages(bp, page_count, flags);
> if (unlikely(error))
> @@ -552,7 +553,7 @@ xfs_buf_get(
> if (unlikely(!new_bp))
> return NULL;
>
> - error = xfs_buf_allocate_memory(new_bp, flags);
> + error = xfs_buf_allocate_memory(new_bp, blkno, flags);
> if (error) {
> kmem_zone_free(xfs_buf_zone, new_bp);
> return NULL;
While that will fix the problem, I think that I fixed the
underlying problem that required us to set bp->b_bn to -1 at
initialisation in that same series that introduced this problem.
That problem was that we were inserting buffers in a partially
intialised state into the cache and so we couldn't allow IO to be
started on them in the case of a lookup race before the final
initialisation was done. We could detect that case by checking for
bp->b_bn == -1 at any point in time.
We now don't insert the new buffer into the cache until it is fully
initialised, so we don't need to initialise bp->b_bn to -1 anymore -
it can be intialised to the correct block number, which we already
pass to xfs_buf_alloc() for the cached case. Hence I think that's
the better way to solve the problem. If this is done, then the
xfs_buf_alloc() call in xfs_buf_get_uncached() needs to pass
XFS_BUF_DADDR_NULL as the blkno rather than 0 as it currently
does....
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:[~2012-06-05 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-05 11:08 [PATCH] xfs: Fix overallocation in xfs_buf_allocate_memory() Jan Kara
2012-06-05 13:28 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2012-06-05 22:16 ` Jan Kara
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=20120605132852.GB22848@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=bpm@sgi.com \
--cc=elder@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.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