From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] xfs: run blockgc on freeze to avoid iget stalls after reclaim
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 14:41:56 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zb1FhDn09pwFvE7O@bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zbrw07Co5vhrDUfd@dread.disaster.area>
On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 12:16:03PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 10:02:16AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 10:46:12AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 07:46:55AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 02:23:44PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 02:36:45PM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
...
> Here's the fixes for the iget vs inactive vs freeze problems in the
> upstream kernel:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20240201005217.1011010-1-david@fromorbit.com/T/#t
>
> With that sorted, are there any other issues we know about that
> running a blockgc scan during freeze might work around?
>
The primary motivation for the scan patch was the downstream/stable
deadlock issue. The reason I posted it upstream is because when I
considered the overall behavior change, I thought it uniformly
beneficial to both contexts based on the (minor) benefits of the side
effects of the scan. You don't need me to enumerate them, and none of
them are uniquely important or worth overanalyzing.
The only real question that matters here is do you agree with the
general reasoning for a blockgc scan during freeze, or shall I drop the
patch?
Brian
> -Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-02 19:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-19 19:36 [RFC PATCH v2] xfs: run blockgc on freeze to avoid iget stalls after reclaim Brian Foster
2024-01-20 8:50 ` Amir Goldstein
2024-01-25 12:25 ` Brian Foster
2024-01-22 3:23 ` Dave Chinner
2024-01-25 12:46 ` Brian Foster
2024-01-25 23:46 ` Dave Chinner
2024-01-29 15:02 ` Brian Foster
2024-02-01 1:16 ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-02 19:41 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2024-02-02 23:33 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-04 16:03 ` Brian Foster
2024-02-05 22:07 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-06 13:28 ` Brian Foster
2024-02-07 17:36 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-08 12:54 ` Brian Foster
2024-02-09 0:23 ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-12 19:43 ` Brian Foster
2024-02-13 17:56 ` Brian Foster
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=Zb1FhDn09pwFvE7O@bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--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