From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>
Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 09/10] xfs: stop the steal (of data blocks for RT indirect blocks)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:04:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240226100420.280408-10-hch@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240226100420.280408-1-hch@lst.de>
When xfs_bmap_del_extent_delay has to split an indirect block it tries
to steal blocks from the the part that gets unmapped to increase the
indirect block reservation that now needs to cover for two extents
instead of one.
This works perfectly fine on the data device, where the data and
indirect blocks come from the same pool. It has no chance of working
when the inode sits on the RT device. To support re-enabling delalloc
for inodes on the RT device, make this behavior conditional on not
beeing for rt extents. For an RT extent try allocate new blocks or
otherwise just give up.
Note that split of delalloc extents should only happen on writeback
failure, as for other kinds of hole punching we first write back all
data and thus convert the delalloc reservations covering the hole to
a real allocation.
Note that restoring a quota reservation is always a bit problematic,
but the force flag should take care of it. That is, if we actually
supported quota with the RT volume, which seems to not be the case
at the moment.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
index fc42f17f86e1f0..2732084e3aebff 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
@@ -4912,6 +4912,30 @@ xfs_bmap_del_extent_delay(
WARN_ON_ONCE(!got_indlen || !new_indlen);
stolen = xfs_bmap_split_indlen(da_old, &got_indlen, &new_indlen,
del->br_blockcount);
+ if (isrt && stolen) {
+ /*
+ * Ugg, we can't just steal reservations from the data
+ * blocks as the data blocks come from a different pool.
+ *
+ * So we have to try to increase our reservations here,
+ * and if that fails we have to fail the unmap. To
+ * avoid that as much as possible dip into the reserve
+ * pool.
+ *
+ * Note that in theory the user/group/project could
+ * be over the quota limit in the meantime, thus we
+ * force the quota accounting even if it was over the
+ * limit.
+ */
+ error = xfs_dec_fdblocks(mp, stolen, true);
+ if (error) {
+ ip->i_delayed_blks += del->br_blockcount;
+ xfs_trans_reserve_quota_nblks(NULL, ip, 0,
+ del->br_blockcount, true);
+ return error;
+ }
+ xfs_mod_delalloc(ip, 0, stolen);
+ }
got->br_startblock = nullstartblock((int)got_indlen);
@@ -4924,7 +4948,8 @@ xfs_bmap_del_extent_delay(
xfs_iext_insert(ip, icur, &new, state);
da_new = got_indlen + new_indlen - stolen;
- del->br_blockcount -= stolen;
+ if (!isrt)
+ del->br_blockcount -= stolen;
break;
}
--
2.39.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-26 10:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-26 10:04 bring back RT delalloc support v3 Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-26 10:04 ` [PATCH 01/10] xfs: make XFS_TRANS_LOWMODE match the other XFS_TRANS_ definitions Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-26 10:04 ` [PATCH 02/10] xfs: move RT inode locking out of __xfs_bunmapi Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-26 10:04 ` [PATCH 03/10] xfs: block deltas in xfs_trans_unreserve_and_mod_sb must be positive Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-26 10:04 ` [PATCH 04/10] xfs: split xfs_mod_freecounter Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-26 18:01 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-26 10:04 ` [PATCH 05/10] xfs: reinstate RT support in xfs_bmapi_reserve_delalloc Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-26 10:04 ` [PATCH 06/10] xfs: cleanup fdblock/frextent accounting in xfs_bmap_del_extent_delay Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-26 10:04 ` [PATCH 07/10] xfs: support RT inodes in xfs_mod_delalloc Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-26 17:48 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-26 10:04 ` [PATCH 08/10] xfs: look at m_frextents in xfs_iomap_prealloc_size for RT allocations Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-26 10:04 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2024-02-26 10:04 ` [PATCH 10/10] xfs: reinstate delalloc for RT inodes (if sb_rextsize == 1) Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-02-23 7:14 bring back RT delalloc support v2 Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-23 7:15 ` [PATCH 09/10] xfs: stop the steal (of data blocks for RT indirect blocks) Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-23 17:25 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=20240226100420.280408-10-hch@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
--cc=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