From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [patch] sys_sync livelock fix
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:13:14 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C69A18A.501BAD42@zip.com.au> (raw)
The get_request fairness patch exposed a livelock
in the buffer layer. write_unlocked_buffers() will
not terminate while other tasks are generating write traffic.
The patch simply bales out after writing all the buffers which
were dirty at the time the function was called, rather than
keeping on trying to write buffers until the list is empty.
Given that /bin/sync calls write_unlocked_buffers() three times,
that's good enough. sync still takes aaaaaages, but it terminates.
--- linux-2.4.18-pre9-ac2/fs/buffer.c Tue Feb 12 12:26:41 2002
+++ ac24/fs/buffer.c Tue Feb 12 14:39:39 2002
@@ -189,12 +189,13 @@ static void write_locked_buffers(struct
* return without it!
*/
#define NRSYNC (32)
-static int write_some_buffers(kdev_t dev)
+static int write_some_buffers(kdev_t dev, signed long *nr_to_write)
{
struct buffer_head *next;
struct buffer_head *array[NRSYNC];
unsigned int count;
int nr;
+ int ret;
next = lru_list[BUF_DIRTY];
nr = nr_buffers_type[BUF_DIRTY];
@@ -213,29 +214,38 @@ static int write_some_buffers(kdev_t dev
array[count++] = bh;
if (count < NRSYNC)
continue;
-
- spin_unlock(&lru_list_lock);
- write_locked_buffers(array, count);
- return -EAGAIN;
+ ret = -EAGAIN;
+ goto writeout;
}
unlock_buffer(bh);
__refile_buffer(bh);
}
+ ret = 0;
+writeout:
spin_unlock(&lru_list_lock);
-
- if (count)
+ if (count) {
write_locked_buffers(array, count);
- return 0;
+ if (nr_to_write)
+ *nr_to_write -= count;
+ }
+ return ret;
}
/*
- * Write out all buffers on the dirty list.
+ * Because we drop the locking during I/O it's not possible
+ * to write out all the buffers. So the only guarantee that
+ * we can make here is that we write out all the buffers which
+ * were dirty at the time write_unlocked_buffers() was called.
+ * fsync_dev() calls in here three times, so we end up writing
+ * many more buffers than ever appear on BUF_DIRTY.
*/
static void write_unlocked_buffers(kdev_t dev)
{
+ signed long nr_to_write = nr_buffers_type[BUF_DIRTY] * 2;
+
do {
spin_lock(&lru_list_lock);
- } while (write_some_buffers(dev));
+ } while (write_some_buffers(dev, &nr_to_write) && (nr_to_write > 0));
run_task_queue(&tq_disk);
}
@@ -1085,7 +1095,7 @@ void balance_dirty(void)
*/
if (state > 0) {
spin_lock(&lru_list_lock);
- write_some_buffers(NODEV);
+ write_some_buffers(NODEV, NULL);
wait_for_some_buffers(NODEV);
}
}
@@ -2846,7 +2856,7 @@ static int sync_old_buffers(void)
bh = lru_list[BUF_DIRTY];
if (!bh || time_before(jiffies, bh->b_flushtime))
break;
- if (write_some_buffers(NODEV))
+ if (write_some_buffers(NODEV, NULL))
continue;
return 0;
}
@@ -2945,7 +2955,7 @@ int bdflush(void *startup)
CHECK_EMERGENCY_SYNC
spin_lock(&lru_list_lock);
- if (!write_some_buffers(NODEV) || balance_dirty_state() < 0) {
+ if (!write_some_buffers(NODEV, NULL) || balance_dirty_state() < 0) {
wait_for_some_buffers(NODEV);
interruptible_sleep_on(&bdflush_wait);
}
-
next reply other threads:[~2002-02-12 23:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-12 23:13 Andrew Morton [this message]
2002-02-12 23:31 ` [patch] sys_sync livelock fix Alan Cox
2002-02-12 23:22 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-13 0:28 ` Alan Cox
2002-02-13 3:28 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 3:46 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-02-13 15:11 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 22:24 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 22:41 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-02-14 0:26 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-14 0:37 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-14 0:49 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-14 0:53 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-14 1:27 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-14 1:29 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-14 1:59 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-02-14 2:07 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 23:31 ` Rob Landley
2002-02-14 0:44 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-12 23:29 ` Rik van Riel
2002-02-13 0:25 ` Alan Cox
2002-02-13 0:15 ` Rik van Riel
2002-02-13 0:36 ` Alan Cox
2002-02-13 0:36 ` Rik van Riel
2002-02-13 0:39 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-13 3:42 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 3:54 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 4:01 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-02-13 4:53 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 15:17 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 4:29 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-13 5:21 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 5:35 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-18 2:29 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 14:09 ` bill davidsen
2002-02-13 15:29 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 22:53 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-14 0:33 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 1:36 ` What is a livelock? (was: [patch] sys_sync livelock fix) Olaf Dietsche
2002-02-13 1:56 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-13 2:30 ` Olaf Dietsche
2002-02-13 2:39 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-13 16:19 ` Olaf Dietsche
2002-02-13 2:52 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-02-18 22:19 ` David Schwartz
2002-02-13 2:33 ` Rob Landley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-02-13 9:18 [patch] sys_sync livelock fix Andries.Brouwer
2002-02-14 0:57 Andries.Brouwer
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=3C69A18A.501BAD42@zip.com.au \
--to=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@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