From: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
jens.axboe@oracle.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: reset inode dirty time when adding it back to empty s_dirty list
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:41:13 +0900 (WST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0903241334330.3248@zeus.themaw.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1237840233-11045-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com>
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Jeff Layton wrote:
> This may be a problem on other filesystems too, but the reproducer I
> have involves NFS.
>
> On NFS, the __mark_inode_dirty() call after writing back the inode is
> done in the rpc_release handler for COMMIT calls. This call is done
> asynchronously after the call completes.
>
> Because there's no real coordination between __mark_inode_dirty() and
> __sync_single_inode(), it's often the case that these two calls will
> race and __mark_inode_dirty() will get called while I_SYNC is still set.
> When this happens, __sync_single_inode() should detect that the inode
> was redirtied while we were flushing it and call redirty_tail() to put
> it back on the s_dirty list.
>
> When redirty_tail() puts it back on the list, it only resets the
> dirtied_when value if it's necessary to maintain the list order. Given
> the right situation (the right I/O patterns and a lot of luck), this
> could result in dirtied_when never getting updated on an inode that's
> constantly being redirtied while pdflush is writing it back.
>
> Since dirtied_when is based on jiffies, it's possible for it to persist
> across 2 sign-bit flips of jiffies. When that happens, the time_after()
> check in sync_sb_inodes no longer works correctly and writeouts by
> pdflush of this inode and any inodes after it on the list stop.
>
> This patch fixes this by resetting the dirtied_when value on an inode
> when we're adding it back onto an empty s_dirty list. Since we generally
> write inodes from oldest to newest dirtied_when values, this has the
> effect of making it so that these inodes don't end up with dirtied_when
> values that are frozen.
>
> I've also taken the liberty of fixing up the comments a bit and changed
> the !time_after_eq() check in redirty_tail to be time_before(). That
> should be functionally equivalent but I think it's more readable.
>
> I wish this were just a theoretical problem, but we've had a customer
> hit a variant of it in an older kernel. Newer upstream kernels have a
> number of changes that make this problem less likely. As best I can tell
> though, there is nothing that really prevents it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
The assumption is that all inodes heading for the s_dirty list will get
their by calling redirty_tail(). It looks like that's the case but, Andrew
do you agree the assumption holds?
> ---
> fs/fs-writeback.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> index e3fe991..bd2a7ff 100644
> --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> @@ -184,19 +184,31 @@ static int write_inode(struct inode *inode, int sync)
> * furthest end of its superblock's dirty-inode list.
> *
> * Before stamping the inode's ->dirtied_when, we check to see whether it is
> - * already the most-recently-dirtied inode on the s_dirty list. If that is
> - * the case then the inode must have been redirtied while it was being written
> - * out and we don't reset its dirtied_when.
> + * "newer" or equal to that of the most-recently-dirtied inode on the s_dirty
> + * list. If that is the case then we don't need to restamp it to maintain the
> + * order of the list.
> + *
> + * If s_dirty is empty however, then we need to go ahead and update
> + * dirtied_when for the inode. Not doing so will mean that inodes that are
> + * constantly being redirtied can end up with "stuck" dirtied_when values if
> + * they happen to consistently be the first one to go back on the list.
> + *
> + * Since we're using jiffies values in that field, letting dirtied_when grow
> + * too old will be problematic if jiffies wraps. It may also be causing
> + * pdflush to flush the inode too often since it'll always look like it was
> + * dirtied a long time ago.
> */
> static void redirty_tail(struct inode *inode)
> {
> struct super_block *sb = inode->i_sb;
>
> - if (!list_empty(&sb->s_dirty)) {
> + if (list_empty(&sb->s_dirty)) {
> + inode->dirtied_when = jiffies;
> + } else {
> struct inode *tail_inode;
>
> tail_inode = list_entry(sb->s_dirty.next, struct inode, i_list);
> - if (!time_after_eq(inode->dirtied_when,
> + if (time_before(inode->dirtied_when,
> tail_inode->dirtied_when))
> inode->dirtied_when = jiffies;
> }
> --
> 1.6.0.6
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-24 4:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-23 20:30 Jeff Layton
2009-03-24 4:41 ` Ian Kent [this message]
2009-03-24 5:04 ` Ian Kent
2009-03-24 13:57 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-24 14:27 ` Ian Kent
2009-03-24 14:28 ` Jeff Layton
2009-03-24 14:46 ` Jeff Layton
2009-03-24 15:04 ` Ian Kent
2009-03-25 2:25 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-25 1:28 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-25 2:15 ` Jeff Layton
2009-03-25 2:50 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-25 11:51 ` Jeff Layton
2009-03-25 12:17 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-25 13:13 ` Jeff Layton
2009-03-25 13:18 ` Ian Kent
2009-03-25 13:38 ` Ian Kent
2009-03-25 13:44 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-25 14:00 ` Jeff Layton
2009-03-25 14:16 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-25 14:28 ` Jeff Layton
2009-03-25 14:38 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-26 17:03 ` Jeff Layton
2009-03-27 2:13 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-27 11:16 ` Jeff Layton
2009-03-28 12:44 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-25 16:55 ` hch
2009-03-25 20:07 ` Chris Mason
2009-03-25 2:56 ` Ian Kent
2009-03-25 3:28 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-25 5:03 ` Ian Kent
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.0903241334330.3248@zeus.themaw.net \
--to=raven@themaw.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®