From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] xfs: avoid COW fork extent lookups in writeback if the fork didn't change
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 09:13:38 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180717231338.GB19934@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180717133710.GA15892@lst.de>
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 03:37:10PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 10:03:01AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > if (imap_valid &&
> > > - (!xfs_inode_has_cow_data(ip) || wpc->io_type == XFS_IO_COW))
> > > + (!xfs_inode_has_cow_data(ip) ||
> > > + wpc->io_type == XFS_IO_COW ||
> > > + wpc->cow_seq == ip->i_cowfp->if_seq))
> > > return 0;
> >
> > Isn't this racy? It's not an atomic variable, we hold no locks,
> > there are no memory barriers, etc. Hence we can miss changes made by
> > concurrent mapping changes...
> >
> > Which makes me ask - is the sequence number bumped before or after
> > we modify the extent map? It seems to me that it needs to be done
> > before we make a modification so that we invalidate the current map
> > before we change the extent map to avoid issuing IO to an extent map
> > we are know we changing, right?
>
> Right now they are bumped later, but they really should be first.
>
> I've got a series that bumps them first now.
Cool.
> That being said at least for the COW fork I don't think we care
> about the races too much. All the actual updates to the COW fork
> are under the page lock, so for a given page we are synchronized
> already. And for the bigger picture we either convert a COW
> fork to a real fork, in which case the change doesn't matter, or
> we drop it, in which case we already have higher level synchronization.
Ok.
>
> For the data fork things might be more nasty, and that could explain
> why my trivial extension to that just didn't work at all..
Yeah, my patch was catching data fork modifications as well.
IIRC I ended up putting the seqno bump and checks under the
ip->i_flags_lock as a quick method of serialising updates, and that
made the update vs check races go away. It didn't make all the
problems go away - just the ones that were easy to reproduce - but
those remaining bugs may have been in other parts of the patchset
that I never got to the bottom of...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-17 23:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-12 13:49 reduce lookups in the COW extent tree V2 Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 1/6] xfs: remove if_real_bytes Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 2/6] xfs: simplify xfs_idata_realloc Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 3/6] xfs: remove the xfs_ifork_t typedef Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 4/6] xfs: introduce a new xfs_inode_has_cow_data helper Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 5/6] xfs: maintain a sequence count for inode fork manipulations Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-13 22:50 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 6/6] xfs: avoid COW fork extent lookups in writeback if the fork didn't change Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-13 22:51 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-14 0:03 ` Dave Chinner
2018-07-17 13:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-17 23:13 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-07-17 23:23 reduce lookups in the COW extent tree V3 Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-17 23:24 ` [PATCH 6/6] xfs: avoid COW fork extent lookups in writeback if the fork didn't change Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-18 14:51 ` Carlos Maiolino
2018-07-21 23:23 ` Dave Chinner
2018-07-23 7:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-24 22:35 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-27 15:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-08-06 2:37 ` Dave Chinner
2018-08-06 16:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-10 6:05 reduce lookups in the COW extent tree Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-10 6:05 ` [PATCH 6/6] xfs: avoid COW fork extent lookups in writeback if the fork didn't change Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-11 17:15 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-11 17:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-11 17:31 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-11 17:35 ` 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=20180717231338.GB19934@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).