linux-xfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org
To: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [Bug 202053] [xfstests generic/464]: XFS corruption and Assertion failed: 0, file: fs/xfs/xfs_super.c, line: 985
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2019 14:57:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-202053-201763-DVa9TIYKeN@https.bugzilla.kernel.org/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-202053-201763@https.bugzilla.kernel.org/>

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=202053

--- Comment #17 from bfoster@redhat.com ---
On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 04:55:18PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:11:01PM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 09:41:14AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 08:57:37AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > For example, I'm concerned that something like sustained buffered writes
> > > could completely break the writeback imap cache by continuously
> > > invalidating it. I think speculative preallocation should help with this
> > > in the common case by already spreading those writes over fewer
> > > allocations, but do we care enough about the case where preallocation
> > > might be turned down/off to try and restrict where we bump the sequence
> > > number (to > i_size changes, for example)? Maybe it's not worth the
> > > trouble just to optimize out a shared ilock cycle and lookup, since the
> > > extent list is still in-core after all.
> > > 
> > 
> > A follow up FWIW... a quick test of some changes to reuse the existing
> > mechanism doesn't appear to show much of a problem in this regard, even
> > with allocsize=4k. I think another thing that minimizes impact is that
> > even if we end up revalidating the same imap over and over, the ioend
> > construction logic is distinct and based on contiguity. IOW, writeback
> > is still sending the same sized I/Os for contiguous blocks...
> 
> Ah, I think you discovered that the delay between write(),
> ->writepages() and the incoming write throttling in
> balance_dirty_pages() creates a large enough dirty page window that
> we avoid lock-stepping write and writepage in a determental way....
> 

That certainly may be another factor, but note that I am able to
reproduce a significant number of spurious invalidations and thus a
significant increase in imap lookups (in the allocsize=4k case). Taking
another look at some trace data, I also see sequences of xfs_iomap_alloc
and xfs_map_blocks_found events in lockstep, though those sequences
aren't terribly long and aren't sustained (which perhaps may be to your
point wrt to buffered write throttling).

I think the larger point is that the following factors altogether:

- buffered write throttling (via dirty pages)
- speculative preallocation in XFS throttling fork changes in the common
  sequential write (file copy) use case
- cached map lookup being fairly cheap (i.e., no extra I/Os) relative to
  I/O
- spurious cached map revals not affecting I/O sizes

... mean that this isn't some blatant problem that makes global
invalidation as such a nonstarter for common usage patterns. I wouldn't
rule out other problems precisely because the spurious invals are there,
as noted above, but so far it seems it's not worth worrying about or
overcomplicating things unless/until we find a use case and workload
noticeably affected by it.

Brian

> AFAICT, the only time we have to worry about this is if we are so
> short of memory the kernel is cleaning every page as soon as it is
> dirtied. If we get into that situation, invalidating the cached map
> is the least of our worries :P
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> dave.
> -- 
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.

      parent reply	other threads:[~2019-01-08 14:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-24  7:16 [Bug 202053] New: [xfstests generic/464]: XFS corruption and Assertion failed: 0, file: fs/xfs/xfs_super.c, line: 985 bugzilla-daemon
2018-12-24  7:19 ` [Bug 202053] " bugzilla-daemon
2018-12-24 10:40 ` bugzilla-daemon
2018-12-24 10:43 ` bugzilla-daemon
2018-12-24 10:49 ` bugzilla-daemon
2018-12-25  6:10 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-04 12:32   ` Brian Foster
2019-01-04 12:52     ` Brian Foster
2019-01-05 21:31     ` Dave Chinner
2019-01-06 21:57       ` Dave Chinner
2019-01-07 14:41         ` Brian Foster
2019-01-07 19:11           ` Brian Foster
2019-01-08  5:55             ` Dave Chinner
2019-01-08 14:57               ` Brian Foster
2019-01-07 14:41       ` Brian Foster
2019-01-08  5:46         ` Dave Chinner
2019-01-08 14:54           ` Brian Foster
2019-01-04 12:40 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-04 12:52 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-05 21:31 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-06 21:57 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-07  2:35 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-07 14:41 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-07 14:41 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-07 19:11 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-08  5:46 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-08  5:55 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-08 14:54 ` bugzilla-daemon
2019-01-08 14:57 ` bugzilla-daemon [this message]

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=bug-202053-201763-DVa9TIYKeN@https.bugzilla.kernel.org/ \
    --to=bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).