public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] xfs: stop artificially limiting the length of bunmap calls
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 09:51:33 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220422235133.GG1544202@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220422221820.GH17059@magnolia>

On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 03:18:20PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 08:01:20AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 03:54:31PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> > > 
> > > In commit e1a4e37cc7b6, we clamped the length of bunmapi calls on the
> > > data forks of shared files to avoid two failure scenarios: one where the
> > > extent being unmapped is so sparsely shared that we exceed the
> > > transaction reservation with the sheer number of refcount btree updates
> > > and EFI intent items; and the other where we attach so many deferred
> > > updates to the transaction that we pin the log tail and later the log
> > > head meets the tail, causing the log to livelock.
> > > 
> > > We avoid triggering the first problem by tracking the number of ops in
> > > the refcount btree cursor and forcing a requeue of the refcount intent
> > > item any time we think that we might be close to overflowing.  This has
> > > been baked into XFS since before the original e1a4 patch.
> > > 
> > > A recent patchset fixed the second problem by changing the deferred ops
> > > code to finish all the work items created by each round of trying to
> > > complete a refcount intent item, which eliminates the long chains of
> > > deferred items (27dad); and causing long-running transactions to relog
> > > their intent log items when space in the log gets low (74f4d).
> > > 
> > > Because this clamp affects /any/ unmapping request regardless of the
> > > sharing factors of the component blocks, it degrades the performance of
> > > all large unmapping requests -- whereas with an unshared file we can
> > > unmap millions of blocks in one go, shared files are limited to
> > > unmapping a few thousand blocks at a time, which causes the upper level
> > > code to spin in a bunmapi loop even if it wasn't needed.
> > > 
> > > This also eliminates one more place where log recovery behavior can
> > > differ from online behavior, because bunmapi operations no longer need
> > > to requeue.
> > > 
> > > Partial-revert-of: e1a4e37cc7b6 ("xfs: try to avoid blowing out the transaction reservation when bunmaping a shared extent")
> > > Depends: 27dada070d59 ("xfs: change the order in which child and parent defer ops ar finished")
> > > Depends: 74f4d6a1e065 ("xfs: only relog deferred intent items if free space in the log gets low")
> > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > >  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c     |   22 +---------------------
> > >  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_refcount.c |    5 ++---
> > >  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_refcount.h |    8 ++------
> > >  3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> > 
> > This looks reasonable, but I'm wondering how the original problem
> > was discovered and whether this has been tested against that
> > original problem situation to ensure we aren't introducing a
> > regression here....
> 
> generic/447, and yes, I have forced it to run a deletion of 1 million
> extents without incident. :)

Ok, that's all I wanted to know :)

Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>

-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-22 23:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-14 22:54 [PATCHSET 0/6] xfs: fix reflink inefficiencies Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-14 22:54 ` [PATCH 1/6] xfs: stop artificially limiting the length of bunmap calls Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-22 22:01   ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-22 22:18     ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-22 23:51       ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2022-04-26 13:46   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-26 14:52     ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-14 22:54 ` [PATCH 2/6] xfs: remove a __xfs_bunmapi call from reflink Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-22 22:03   ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-26 13:47   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-14 22:54 ` [PATCH 3/6] xfs: create shadow transaction reservations for computing minimum log size Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-22 22:36   ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-25 23:39     ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-26  4:24       ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-26  5:10         ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-14 22:54 ` [PATCH 4/6] xfs: reduce the absurdly large log reservations Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-22 22:51   ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-25 23:47     ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-26  4:25       ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-14 22:54 ` [PATCH 5/6] xfs: reduce transaction reservations with reflink Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-22 23:42   ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-25 23:49     ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-14 22:54 ` [PATCH 6/6] xfs: rewrite xfs_reflink_end_cow to use intents Darrick J. Wong
2022-04-22 23:50   ` 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=20220422235133.GG1544202@dread.disaster.area \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --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