Re: [RFC v5 PATCH 0/9] xfs: automatic relogging experiment

Darrick J. Wong
2020-02-27T15:23:08Z

On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 10:18:14AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 07:09:36AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 08:43:12AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Here's a v5 RFC of the automatic item relogging experiment. Firstly,
> > > note that this is still a POC and experimental code with various quirks.
> >
> > Heh, funny, I was going to ask you if you might have time next week to
> > review the latest iteration of the btree bulk loading series so that I
> > could get closer to merging the rest of online repair and/or refactoring
> > offline repair. I'll take a closer look at this after I read through
> > everything else that came in overnight.
> >
>
> Sure.. I can put that next on the list. Is the latest release pending a
> post or already posted? Being out for over a month (effectively closer
> to two when considering proximity to the holidays) caused me to pretty
> much clear everything in my mailbox for obvious reasons. ;) As a result,
> anything that might have been on my radar prior to that timeframe has
> most likely dropped completely off it. :P

Pending. The patches themselves haven't changed much since the end of
October when I fixed all the things we talked about at the beginning of
that month, but you might as well wait for a new version rebased off
5.6. :)

(If you get really really bored and/or I get bogged down in something
else, the NYE patchbomb version is pretty close to what's in my tree
now...)

--D

> Brian
>
> > --D
> >
> > > Some are documented in the code, others might not be (such as abusing
> > > the AIL lock, etc.). The primary purpose of this series is still to
> > > express and review a fundamental design. Based on discussion on the last
> > > version, there is specific focus towards addressing log reservation and
> > > pre-item locking deadlock vectors. While the code is still quite hacky,
> > > I believe this design addresses both of those fundamental issues.
> > > Further details on the design and approach are documented in the
> > > individual commit logs.
> > >
> > > In addition, the final few patches introduce buffer relogging capability
> > > and test infrastructure, which currently has no use case other than to
> > > demonstrate development flexibility and the ability to support arbitrary
> > > log items in the future, if ever desired. If this approach is taken
> > > forward, the current use cases are still centered around intent items
> > > such as the quotaoff use case and extent freeing use case defined by
> > > online repair of free space trees.
> > >
> > > On somewhat of a tangent, another intent oriented use case idea crossed
> > > my mind recently related to the long standing writeback stale data
> > > exposure problem (i.e. if we crash after a delalloc extent is converted
> > > but before writeback fully completes on the extent). The obvious
> > > approach of using unwritten extents has been rebuffed due to performance
> > > concerns over extent conversion. I wonder if we had the ability to log a
> > > "writeback pending" intent on some reasonable level of granularity (i.e.
> > > something between a block and extent), whether we could use that to
> > > allow log recovery to zero (or convert) such extents in the event of a
> > > crash. This is a whole separate design discussion, however, as it
> > > involves tracking outstanding writeback, etc. In this context it simply
> > > serves as a prospective use case for relogging, as such intents would
> > > otherwise risk similar log subsystem deadlocks as the quotaoff use case.
> > >
> > > Thoughts, reviews, flames appreciated.
> > >
> > > Brian
> > >
> > > rfcv5:
> > > - More fleshed out design to prevent log reservation deadlock and
> > > locking problems.
> > > - Split out core patches between pre-reservation management, relog item
> > > state management and relog mechanism.
> > > - Added experimental buffer relogging capability.
> > > rfcv4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191205175037.52529-1-bfoster@redhat.com/
> > > - AIL based approach.
> > > rfcv3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191125185523.47556-1-bfoster@redhat.com/
> > > - CIL based approach.
> > > rfcv2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191122181927.32870-1-bfoster@redhat.com/
> > > - Different approach based on workqueue and transaction rolling.
> > > rfc: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191024172850.7698-1-bfoster@redhat.com/
> > >
> > > Brian Foster (9):
> > > xfs: set t_task at wait time instead of alloc time
> > > xfs: introduce ->tr_relog transaction
> > > xfs: automatic relogging reservation management
> > > xfs: automatic relogging item management
> > > xfs: automatic log item relog mechanism
> > > xfs: automatically relog the quotaoff start intent
> > > xfs: buffer relogging support prototype
> > > xfs: create an error tag for random relog reservation
> > > xfs: relog random buffers based on errortag
> > >
> > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_errortag.h | 4 +-
> > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_shared.h | 1 +
> > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_resv.c | 24 +++-
> > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_resv.h | 1 +
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c | 5 +
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_dquot_item.c | 7 ++
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_error.c | 3 +
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_log.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c | 12 +-
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_trace.h | 3 +
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c | 79 +++++++++++-
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans.h | 13 +-
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans_ail.c | 216 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans_buf.c | 35 ++++++
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans_priv.h | 6 +
> > > 15 files changed, 399 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.21.1
> > >
> >
>