Thread (33 messages) 33 messages, 6 authors, 2008-08-21

Re: [PATCH] jbd jbd2: fix dio write returning EIO whentry_to_release_page fails

From: Mingming Cao <hidden>
Date: 2008-08-06 22:57:58
Also in: linux-fsdevel

在 2008-08-06三的 15:53 +0200,Jan Kara写道:
On Wed 06-08-08 09:25:13, Chris Mason wrote:
quoted
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 14:17 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
quoted
在 2008-08-05二的 12:17 -0400,Chris Mason写道:
quoted
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 13:51 +0900, Hisashi Hifumi wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
diff -Nrup linux-2.6.27-rc1.org/fs/jbd/transaction.c 
linux-2.6.27-rc1/fs/jbd/transaction.c
quoted
quoted
--- linux-2.6.27-rc1.org/fs/jbd/transaction.c	2008-07-29 
19:28:47.000000000 +0900
quoted
quoted
+++ linux-2.6.27-rc1/fs/jbd/transaction.c	2008-07-29 20:40:12.000000000 +0900
@@ -1764,6 +1764,12 @@ int journal_try_to_free_buffers(journal_
 	*/
 	if (ret == 0 && (gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT) && (gfp_mask & __GFP_FS)) {
 		journal_wait_for_transaction_sync_data(journal);
+
+		bh = head;
+		do {
+			while (atomic_read(&bh->b_count))
+				schedule();
+		} while ((bh = bh->b_this_page) != head);
 		ret = try_to_free_buffers(page);
 	}
The loop is problematic.  If the scheduler decides to keep running this
task then we have a busy loop.  If this task has realtime policy then
it might even lock up the kernel.
ocfs2 calls journal_try_to_free_buffers too, looping on b_count might
not be the best idea there either.

This code gets called from releasepage, which is used other places than
the O_DIRECT invalidation paths, I'd be worried about performance
problems here.
try_to_release_page has gfp_mask parameter. So when try_to_releasepage
is called from performance sensitive part, gfp_mask should not be set.
b_count check loop is inside of (gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT) && (gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) check.
Looks like try_to_free_pages will go into releasepage with wait & fs
both set.  This kind of change would make me very nervous.
Hi Chris,

The gfp_mask try_to_free_pages() takes from it's caller will past it
down to try_to_release_page().  Based on the meaning of __GFP_WAIT and
GFP_FS, if the upper level caller set these two flags,  I assume the
upper level caller expect delay and wait for fs to finish?


But I agree that using a loop in journal_try_to_free_buffers() to wait
for the busy bh release the counter is expensive...
I rediscovered your old thread about trying to do this in a launder_page
call ;)
  Yes, we thought about using launder_page() before :).
quoted
Does it make more sense to fix do_launder_page to call into the FS on
every page, and let the FS check for PageDirty on its own?  That way
invalidate_inode_pages2_range basically gets its own private call into
the FS that says wait around until this page is really free.
  That would certainly work as well. But IMHO waiting for ->writepage()
call to finish isn't really a big deal even in try_to_release_page() if
__GFP_FS (and __GFP_WAIT) is set. The only problem is that there is no
effective way to do so and so Hisashi used that "wait for b_count to drop"
which looks really scary and I don't like it as well.
I was  looking at the comment in invalidate_complete_page2(), which is
now only called from DIO path, it saids

/*
 * This is like invalidate_complete_page(), except it ignores the page's
 * refcount.  We do this because invalidate_inode_pages2() needs
stronger
 * invalidation guarantees, and cannot afford to leave pages behind
because
 * shrink_page_list() has a temp ref on them, or because they're
transiently
 * sitting in the lru_cache_add() pagevecs.
 */


I am wondering why we need stronger invalidate hurantees for DIO->
invalidate_inode_pages_range(),which force the page being removed from
page cache? In case of bh is busy due to ext3 writeout,
journal_try_to_free_buffers() could return different error number(EBUSY)
to try_to_releasepage() (instead of EIO).  In that case,  could we just
leave the page in the cache, clean pageuptodate() (to force later buffer
read to read from disk) and then invalidate_complete_page2() return
successfully? Any issue with this way?

Mingming



									Honza
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help