From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xfs: re-enable xfsaild idle mode and fix associated races
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 04:05:23 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120620080523.GA26167@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1339087793-45731-1-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 12:49:53PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> xfsaild idle mode logic currently leads to a couple hangs:
>
> 1.) If xfsaild is rescheduled in during an incremental scan
> (i.e., tout != 0) and the target has been updated since
> the previous run, we can hit the new target and go into
> idle mode with a still populated ail.
> 2.) A wake up is only issued when the target is pushed forward.
> The wake up can race with xfsaild if it is currently in the
> process of entering idle mode, causing future wake up
> events to be lost.
>
> Both hangs are reproducible by running xfstests 273 in a loop.
> Modify xfsaild to enter idle mode only when the ail is empty
> and the push target has not been moved forward since the last
> push.
What tree is this against? The current XFS tree never fully idles,
so something is missing here, probably just in the patch description.
> spin_lock(&ailp->xa_lock);
> +
> + /* barrier matches the xa_target update in xfs_ail_push() */
> + smp_rmb();
> + target = ailp->xa_target;
> + ailp->xa_target_prev = target;
> +
> lip = xfs_trans_ail_cursor_first(ailp, &cur, ailp->xa_last_pushed_lsn);
> if (!lip) {
> /*
> +
> + spin_lock(&ailp->xa_lock);
> +
> + /*
> + * Idle if the AIL is empty and we are not racing with a target
> + * update. The barrier matches the xa_target update in
> + * xfs_ail_push().
> + */
> + smp_rmb();
Given that both sides are under xa_lock I can't see any need for
barriers here.
> + if (!xfs_ail_min(ailp) && (ailp->xa_target == ailp->xa_target_prev)) {
> + spin_unlock(&ailp->xa_lock);
> + schedule();
> + tout = 0;
> + continue;
> + }
This seems to add the actual idling, but in a rather confusing way.
Can you add the xfs_ail_min and target checks to the end of xfsaild_push
so that they are in one place with the other decisions for the timeout.
Please also add a comment explaining the conditions when we want to
idle.
Also two small style nipicks:
- please make sure lines are shorter than 80 characters
- no need for the braces around the target comparism above.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-20 8:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-07 16:49 [PATCH v2] xfs: re-enable xfsaild idle mode and fix associated races Brian Foster
2012-06-20 8:05 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2012-06-20 15:35 ` Brian Foster
2012-06-20 15:59 ` Brian Foster
2012-06-20 22:35 ` Dave Chinner
2012-06-21 7:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20120620080523.GA26167@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=bfoster@redhat.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