From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] xfs: initialise xfssync work before running quotachecks
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 10:10:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F7086FA.9010003@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120325232253.GJ5091@dastard>
On 03/25/12 18:22, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 08:34:31AM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
>> > On 03/22/12 16:07, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> > >On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:15:48AM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
>>>> > >>On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 04:15:08PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>>>> > >>>From: Dave Chinner<dchinner@redhat.com>
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>>Because the mount process can run a quotacheck and consume lots of
>>>>> > >>>inodes, we need to be able to run periodic inode reclaim during the
>>>>> > >>>mount process. This will prevent running the system out of memory
>>>>> > >>>during quota checks.
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>>This essentially reverts 2bcf6e97, but that is safe to do now that
>>>>> > >>>the quota sync code that was causing problems during long quotacheck
>>>>> > >>>executions is now gone.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>Dave, I've held off on #s 3 and 4 because they appear to be racy. Being
>>> > >
>>> > >What race?
>>> > >
>>> > >Cheers,
>>> > >
>>> > >Dave
>> >
>> >
>> > 2 of the sync workers use iterators
>> > xfs_inode_ag_iterator()
>> > xfs_perag_get()
>> > radix_tree_lookup(&mp->m_perag_tree, agno)
>> >
>> > The race I was worried about was in xfs_mount() to initialize the
>> > mp->m_perag_lock, and the radix tree initialization:
>> > INIT_RADIX_TREE(&mp->m_perag_tree, GFP_ATOMIC)).
>> >
>> > There is a lock and 2 or 3 unbuffered I/O are performed in xfs_mountfs()
>> > before the mp->m_perag_tree is initialized.
> Yes they are uncached IOs so do not utilise the cache that
> requires the mp->m_perag_tree to be initialised.
The point I was trying to make is the sync workers use iterators. The
race is to get the mp->m_perag_tree initialized before one of the sync
workers tries to do a xfs_perag_get().
I mentioned the lock and the 2 or 3 unbuffered I/O because they are the
potential items that can take some time between starting the sync
workers and intializing the m_perag_tree radix tree.
>> > I was also looking at the xfs_perag_t being allocated in mountfs()
>> > and being deallocated in umountfs(), but it turns out that is not
>> > important, xfs_perag_get() will return NULL if these have not been
>> > allocated yet or have been removed for the required ag.
> Correct. The other side of that is that if xfssyncd is doing some
> form of inode cache iteration, it will simply not find any perag
> structures to scani and hence won't cause problems. Same with the
> reclaim worker.
>
> Were there any other issues?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com
Thanks,
--Mark Tinguely
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-26 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-22 5:15 [PATH 0/8] xfs: outstanding patches for 3.4 merge window Dave Chinner
2012-03-22 5:15 ` [PATCH 1/8] xfs: Fix open flag handling in open_by_handle code Dave Chinner
2012-03-22 5:15 ` [PATCH 2/8] xfs: introduce an allocation workqueue Dave Chinner
2012-03-22 5:15 ` [PATCH 3/8] xfs: initialise xfssync work before running quotachecks Dave Chinner
2012-03-22 15:15 ` Ben Myers
2012-03-22 21:07 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-23 13:34 ` Mark Tinguely
2012-03-25 23:22 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-26 15:10 ` Mark Tinguely [this message]
2012-03-26 21:57 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-28 19:40 ` Ben Myers
2012-03-29 0:29 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-29 6:30 ` [PATCH v2] xfs: Ensure inode reclaim can run during quotacheck Dave Chinner
2012-03-28 17:38 ` [PATCH 3/8] xfs: initialise xfssync work before running quotachecks Ben Myers
2012-03-28 18:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-28 18:43 ` Ben Myers
2012-03-22 5:15 ` [PATCH 4/8] xfs: remove MS_ACTIVE guard from inode reclaim work Dave Chinner
2012-03-22 5:15 ` [PATCH 5/8] xfs: don't cache inodes read through bulkstat Dave Chinner
2012-03-22 5:15 ` [PATCH 6/8] xfs: Account log unmount transaction correctly Dave Chinner
2012-03-24 8:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-24 22:49 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-26 22:28 ` Ben Myers
2012-03-22 5:15 ` [PATCH 7/8] xfs: fix fstrim offset calculations Dave Chinner
2012-03-24 13:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-27 20:48 ` Ben Myers
2012-03-27 21:42 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-22 5:15 ` [PATCH 8/8] xfs: add lots of attribute trace points Dave Chinner
2012-03-24 13:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-03-27 21:18 ` Ben Myers
2012-03-27 21:45 ` Dave Chinner
2012-03-27 22:01 ` Ben Myers
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=4F7086FA.9010003@sgi.com \
--to=tinguely@sgi.com \
--cc=bpm@sgi.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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