public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/13] xfs: move RT inode locking out of __xfs_bunmapi
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:07:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240327150755.GX6390@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240327110318.2776850-5-hch@lst.de>

On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 12:03:09PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> __xfs_bunmapi is a bit of an odd place to lock the rtbitmap and rtsummary
> inodes given that it is very high level code.  While this only looks ugly
> right now, it will become a problem when supporting delayed allocations
> for RT inodes as __xfs_bunmapi might end up deleting only delalloc extents
> and thus never unlock the rt inodes.
> 
> Move the locking into xfs_bmap_del_extent_real just before the call to
> xfs_rtfree_blocks instead and use a new flag in the transaction to ensure
> that the locking happens only once.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> ---
>  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c   | 15 ++++++++-------
>  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_shared.h |  3 +++
>  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> index 282b44deb9f864..e5e199d325982f 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> @@ -5305,6 +5305,14 @@ xfs_bmap_del_extent_real(
>  		if (xfs_is_reflink_inode(ip) && whichfork == XFS_DATA_FORK) {
>  			xfs_refcount_decrease_extent(tp, del);
>  		} else if (xfs_ifork_is_realtime(ip, whichfork)) {
> +			/*
> +			 * Ensure the bitmap and summary inodes are locked
> +			 * and joined to the transaction before modifying them.
> +			 */
> +			if (!(tp->t_flags & XFS_TRANS_RTBITMAP_LOCKED)) {
> +				tp->t_flags |= XFS_TRANS_RTBITMAP_LOCKED;

How does it happen that xfs_rtfree_blocks gets called more than once in
the same transaction?  Is that simply the effect of xfs_bunmapi_range
and xfs_unmap_exten calling __xfs_bunmapi with
nextents == XFS_ITRUNC_MAX_EXTENTS==2?

What if we simply didn't unmap multiple extents per bunmapi call for
realtime files?  Would that eliminate the need for
XFS_TRANS_RTBITMAP_LOCKED?

--D

> +				xfs_rtbitmap_lock(tp, mp);
> +			}
>  			error = xfs_rtfree_blocks(tp, del->br_startblock,
>  					del->br_blockcount);
>  		} else {
> @@ -5406,13 +5414,6 @@ __xfs_bunmapi(
>  	} else
>  		cur = NULL;
>  
> -	if (isrt) {
> -		/*
> -		 * Synchronize by locking the realtime bitmap.
> -		 */
> -		xfs_rtbitmap_lock(tp, mp);
> -	}
> -
>  	extno = 0;
>  	while (end != (xfs_fileoff_t)-1 && end >= start &&
>  	       (nexts == 0 || extno < nexts)) {
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_shared.h b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_shared.h
> index f35640ad3e7fe4..34f104ed372c09 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_shared.h
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_shared.h
> @@ -137,6 +137,9 @@ void	xfs_log_get_max_trans_res(struct xfs_mount *mp,
>   */
>  #define XFS_TRANS_LOWMODE		(1u << 8)
>  
> +/* Transaction has locked the rtbitmap and rtsum inodes */
> +#define XFS_TRANS_RTBITMAP_LOCKED	(1u << 9)
> +
>  /*
>   * Field values for xfs_trans_mod_sb.
>   */
> -- 
> 2.39.2
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2024-03-27 15:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-27 11:03 bring back RT delalloc support v5 Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 01/13] xfs: make XFS_TRANS_LOWMODE match the other XFS_TRANS_ definitions Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  3:08   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 02/13] xfs: refactor realtime inode locking Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  3:15   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 03/13] xfs: free RT extents after updating the bmap btree Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-27 14:55   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-03-27 17:03     ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  4:13   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-29  4:14     ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-30 21:55       ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 04/13] xfs: move RT inode locking out of __xfs_bunmapi Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-27 15:07   ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2024-03-27 17:06     ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-27 18:06       ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-03-27 18:12         ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  4:15   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 05/13] xfs: block deltas in xfs_trans_unreserve_and_mod_sb must be positive Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  4:16   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 06/13] xfs: split xfs_mod_freecounter Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-27 15:12   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-03-28  4:18   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 07/13] xfs: reinstate RT support in xfs_bmapi_reserve_delalloc Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  4:20   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 08/13] xfs: cleanup fdblock/frextent accounting in xfs_bmap_del_extent_delay Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  4:22   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 09/13] xfs: support RT inodes in xfs_mod_delalloc Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-27 15:20   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-03-27 17:05     ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  4:27   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-28  4:34     ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  4:42       ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-28  8:25         ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28 21:25           ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 10/13] xfs: look at m_frextents in xfs_iomap_prealloc_size for RT allocations Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  4:32   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-28  4:34     ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 11/13] xfs: rework splitting of indirect block reservations Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-27 15:14   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-03-28  4:35   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 12/13] xfs: stop the steal (of data blocks for RT indirect blocks) Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-27 15:18   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-03-28  4:36   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-27 11:03 ` [PATCH 13/13] xfs: reinstate delalloc for RT inodes (if sb_rextsize == 1) Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-28  4:39   ` Dave Chinner
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-04-22 11:20 bring back RT delalloc support v6 Christoph Hellwig
2024-04-22 11:20 ` [PATCH 04/13] xfs: move RT inode locking out of __xfs_bunmapi 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=20240327150755.GX6390@frogsfrogsfrogs \
    --to=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
    --cc=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