From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] libxfs: keep unflushable buffers off the cache MRUs
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 13:34:17 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160105183417.GE38749@bfoster.bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1450733829-9319-10-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 08:37:09AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
>
> There's no point trying to free buffers that are dirty and return
> errors on flush as we have to keep them around until the corruption
> is fixed. Hence if we fail to flush an inode during a cache shake,
> move the buffer to a special dirty MRU list that the cache does not
> shake. This prevents memory pressure from seeing these buffers, but
> allows subsequent cache lookups to still find them through the hash.
> This ensures we don't waste huge amounts of CPU trying to flush and
> reclaim buffers that canot be flushed or reclaimed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> ---
> include/cache.h | 3 ++-
> libxfs/cache.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
...
> diff --git a/libxfs/cache.c b/libxfs/cache.c
> index a48ebd9..d5ea461 100644
> --- a/libxfs/cache.c
> +++ b/libxfs/cache.c
...
> @@ -202,10 +223,11 @@ cache_shake(
> struct cache_node * node;
> unsigned int count;
>
> - ASSERT(priority <= CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY);
> - if (priority > CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY)
> + ASSERT(priority <= CACHE_DIRTY_PRIORITY);
> + if (priority > CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY && !all)
> priority = 0;
>
> +
Extra newline. FWIW, it also looks like the only cache_shake() caller
where all == 0 already prevents calling with priority >
CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY. I think a brief comment in one or both places with
regard to why >max priority is skipped unless 'all == 1' would be good,
though.
Also, it looks like the loop in cache_report() could be updated to dump
the dirty priority mru entry count.
Finally, what happens once a buffer on the dirty mru is fully repaired,
rewritten and released? Is it placed right back on the "unshakeable"
dirty mru or is cn_priority updated somewhere? On further digging, it
looks like a subsequent buffer lookup (__cache_lookup()) drops the
priority, though it appears to be designed to deal with prefetched
buffers and the associated B_INODE..B_DIR_BMAP mappings.
Brian
> mru = &cache->c_mrus[priority];
> count = 0;
> list_head_init(&temp);
> @@ -221,6 +243,8 @@ cache_shake(
>
> /* can't release dirty objects */
> if (cache->flush(node)) {
> + cache_move_to_dirty_mru(cache, node);
> + mru->cm_count--;
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&node->cn_mutex);
> continue;
> }
> @@ -578,7 +602,7 @@ cache_purge(
> {
> int i;
>
> - for (i = 0; i <= CACHE_MAX_PRIORITY; i++)
> + for (i = 0; i <= CACHE_DIRTY_PRIORITY; i++)
> cache_shake(cache, i, 1);
>
> #ifdef CACHE_DEBUG
> --
> 2.5.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-05 18:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-21 21:37 [PATCH 0/9] xfsprogs: big, broken filesystems cause pain Dave Chinner
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 1/9] metadump: clean up btree block region zeroing Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:11 ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 2/9] metadump: bounds check btree block regions being zeroed Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:11 ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 3/9] xfs_mdrestore: correctly account bytes read Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:12 ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 4/9] repair: parallelise phase 7 Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:12 ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 5/9] repair: parallelise uncertin inode processing in phase 3 Dave Chinner
2016-01-04 19:12 ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 6/9] libxfs: directory node splitting does not have an extra block Dave Chinner
2016-01-05 18:34 ` Brian Foster
2016-01-05 22:07 ` Dave Chinner
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 7/9] libxfs: don't discard dirty buffers Dave Chinner
2016-01-05 18:34 ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 8/9] libxfs: don't repeatedly shake unwritable buffers Dave Chinner
2016-01-05 18:34 ` Brian Foster
2015-12-21 21:37 ` [PATCH 9/9] libxfs: keep unflushable buffers off the cache MRUs Dave Chinner
2016-01-05 18:34 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2016-01-05 23:58 ` 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=20160105183417.GE38749@bfoster.bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.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