From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] writeback: avoid extra sync work at enqueue time
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 23:24:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110504212427.GI6968@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110502033035.789279347@intel.com>
On Mon 02-05-11 11:17:53, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> This removes writeback_control.wb_start and does more straightforward
> sync livelock prevention by setting .older_than_this to prevent extra
> inodes from being enqueued in the first place.
>
> --- linux-next.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c 2011-05-02 11:17:24.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-next/fs/fs-writeback.c 2011-05-02 11:17:27.000000000 +0800
> @@ -683,10 +672,12 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writ
> * (quickly) tag currently dirty pages
> * (maybe slowly) sync all tagged pages
> */
> - if (wbc.sync_mode == WB_SYNC_ALL || wbc.tagged_sync)
> + if (wbc.sync_mode == WB_SYNC_ALL || wbc.tagged_sync) {
> write_chunk = LONG_MAX;
> + oldest_jif = jiffies;
> + wbc.older_than_this = &oldest_jif;
> + }
What are the implications of not doing dirty-time livelock avoidance for
other types of writeback? Is that a mistake? I'd prefer to have in
wb_writeback():
if (wbc.for_kupdate)
oldest_jif = jiffies - msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_expire_interval * 10);
else
oldest_jif = jiffies;
wbc.older_than_this = &oldest_jif;
And when you have this, you can make wbc.older_than_this just a plain
number and remove all those checks for wbc.older_than_this == NULL.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-04 21:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-02 3:17 [PATCH 0/3] sync livelock fixes v2 Wu Fengguang
2011-05-02 3:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] writeback: introduce wbc.tagged_sync for the WB_SYNC_NONE sync stage Wu Fengguang
2011-05-04 21:00 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-05 12:14 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-05 13:55 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-05 14:06 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-02 3:17 ` [PATCH 2/3] writeback: update dirtied_when for synced inode to prevent livelock Wu Fengguang
2011-05-04 21:10 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-05 12:18 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-02 3:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] writeback: avoid extra sync work at enqueue time Wu Fengguang
2011-05-04 21:24 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2011-05-05 12:27 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-05 12:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-05 12:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-05 12:48 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-05 14:01 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-05 14:10 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-05 14:13 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-05 14:34 ` Jan Kara
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-04-30 22:36 [PATCH 0/3] sync livelock fixes Wu Fengguang
2011-04-30 22:36 ` [PATCH 3/3] writeback: avoid extra sync work at enqueue time 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=20110504212427.GI6968@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®