From: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
To: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] A deadlock free and best try version of drop_caches()
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 20:28:07 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <406016111.11683@ustc.edu.cn> (raw)
Message-ID: <E1JcJsN-0005K0-RW@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080319220318.GK155407@sgi.com>
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 09:03:18AM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 07:27:29PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 10:28:44PM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> > > Looks like everything is backed up on the inode_lock. Why? Looks
> > > like drop_pagecache_sb() is doing something ..... suboptimal.
> ......
> > > Anyone know the reason why drop_pagecache_sb() uses such a brute-force
> > > mechanism to free up clean page cache pages?
> >
> > Because extensive use of it(out of testings) is discouraged? ;-)
> >
> > I have been running a longer but safer version, let's merge it?
>
> So you walk the inode hash to find inodes? Seems like a nice idea on
> the surface.... Won't it need to hold the iprune_mutex to prevent
> races with prune_icache() and invalidate_list()?
Oh, I didn't notice iprune_mutex :-/
> Hmmmm - what about unhashed inodes? We'll never see them with this
> method of traversal. I ask because I'm working on some prototype
> patches for XFS that avoid using the inode hash altogether and drive
> inode lookup from the multitude of radix trees we have per filesystem
> (for parallelised and lockless inode lookup).
>
> The above scanning method would not work at all with that sort of
> filesystem structure. Perhaps combining the bulk get/put with Jan's
> get/put method for walking the sb inode list would be sufficient?
You mean to move __invalidate_mapping_pages() out of inode_lock in
drop_pagecache_sb()? Sounds reasonable.
BTW, I noticed the following comments on locking order are outdated:
filemap.c
* ->inode_lock
* ->sb_lock (fs/fs-writeback.c)
rmap.c
* sb_lock (within inode_lock in fs/fs-writeback.c)
They are invalidated by this patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/old-2.6-bkcvs.git;a=commit;h=03da8814512f55441b9bd57c1ceddd28fbcf59ba
[PATCH] Rearrangement of inode_lock in writeback_inodes()
[...] It narrows down use of inode_lock and removes unneccassary
nesting of sb_lock and inode_lock. [...]
Thank you,
Fengguang
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-20 12:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-18 11:28 BUG: drop_pagecache_sb vs kjournald lockup David Chinner
2008-03-18 13:43 ` Jan Kara
2008-03-18 20:46 ` David Chinner
2008-03-19 10:08 ` Jan Kara
2008-03-19 12:17 ` David Chinner
[not found] ` <E1JbwS9-0008Gq-7h@localhost>
2008-03-19 22:03 ` [PATCH] A deadlock free and best try version of drop_caches() David Chinner
[not found] ` <E1JcJsN-0005K0-RW@localhost>
2008-03-20 12:28 ` Fengguang Wu [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=406016111.11683@ustc.edu.cn \
--to=wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn \
--cc=dgc@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--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