From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: jack@suse.cz
Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] writeback: merge for_kupdate and !for_kupdate requeue io logics
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 22:51:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090909150600.583737346@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20090909145141.293229693@intel.com
[-- Attachment #1: writeback-more_io_wait-a.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2511 bytes --]
Unify the logic for kupdate and non-kupdate cases.
There won't be starvation because the inodes requeued into b_more_io or
b_more_io_wait will later be spliced _after_ the remaining inodes in b_io,
hence won't stand in the way of other inodes in the next run.
CC: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Martin Bligh <mbligh@google.com>
Cc: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
---
fs/fs-writeback.c | 39 ++++++---------------------------------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
--- linux.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c 2009-09-09 20:47:11.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/fs/fs-writeback.c 2009-09-09 20:48:01.000000000 +0800
@@ -426,45 +426,18 @@ writeback_single_inode(struct inode *ino
} else if (mapping_tagged(mapping, PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY)) {
/*
* We didn't write back all the pages. nfs_writepages()
- * sometimes bales out without doing anything. Redirty
- * the inode; Move it from b_io onto b_more_io/b_dirty.
+ * sometimes bales out without doing anything.
*/
- /*
- * akpm: if the caller was the kupdate function we put
- * this inode at the head of b_dirty so it gets first
- * consideration. Otherwise, move it to the tail, for
- * the reasons described there. I'm not really sure
- * how much sense this makes. Presumably I had a good
- * reasons for doing it this way, and I'd rather not
- * muck with it at present.
- */
- if (wbc->for_kupdate) {
+ inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
+ if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0) {
/*
- * For the kupdate function we move the inode
- * to b_more_io so it will get more writeout as
- * soon as the queue becomes uncongested.
+ * slice used up: queue for next turn
*/
- inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
- if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0) {
- /*
- * slice used up: queue for next turn
- */
- requeue_io(inode);
- } else {
- /*
- * somehow blocked: retry later
- */
- redirty_tail(inode);
- }
+ requeue_io(inode);
} else {
/*
- * Otherwise fully redirty the inode so that
- * other inodes on this superblock will get some
- * writeout. Otherwise heavy writing to one
- * file would indefinitely suspend writeout of
- * all the other files.
+ * somehow blocked: retry later
*/
- inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
redirty_tail(inode);
}
} else if (atomic_read(&inode->i_count)) {
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-09 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-09 14:51 [RFC][PATCH 0/7] some random writeback fixes Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] writeback: cleanup writeback_single_inode() Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 15:45 ` Jan Kara
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] writeback: fix queue_io() ordering Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 15:53 ` Jan Kara
2009-09-10 1:26 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 14:14 ` Jan Kara
2009-09-10 14:17 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] writeback: ensure large files are written in MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES chunks Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] writeback: use 64MB MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 23:29 ` Theodore Tso
2009-09-10 0:13 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 4:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-10 7:35 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] writeback: dont abort inode on congestion Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] writeback: balance_dirty_pages() shall write more than dirtied pages Wu Fengguang
2009-09-09 15:44 ` Jan Kara
2009-09-10 1:42 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 12:57 ` Chris Mason
2009-09-10 13:21 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 14:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-10 15:14 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 15:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-10 15:41 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-10 15:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-10 16:08 ` Wu Fengguang
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=20090909150600.583737346@intel.com \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).