2023-12-14 13:26:16

by Christoph Hellwig

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 03/11] writeback: Factor should_writeback_folio() out of write_cache_pages()

From: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <[email protected]>

Reduce write_cache_pages() by about 30 lines; much of it is commentary,
but it all bundles nicely into an obvious function.

Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
---
mm/page-writeback.c | 59 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
index 5d33e7b468e2cc..5a3df8665ff4f9 100644
--- a/mm/page-writeback.c
+++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
@@ -2394,6 +2394,36 @@ static void writeback_get_batch(struct address_space *mapping,
&wbc->fbatch);
}

+static bool should_writeback_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
+ struct writeback_control *wbc, struct folio *folio)
+{
+ /*
+ * Folio truncated or invalidated. We can freely skip it then,
+ * even for data integrity operations: the folio has disappeared
+ * concurrently, so there could be no real expectation of this
+ * data integrity operation even if there is now a new, dirty
+ * folio at the same pagecache index.
+ */
+ if (unlikely(folio->mapping != mapping))
+ return false;
+
+ /* Did somebody write it for us? */
+ if (!folio_test_dirty(folio))
+ return false;
+
+ if (folio_test_writeback(folio)) {
+ if (wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_NONE)
+ return false;
+ folio_wait_writeback(folio);
+ }
+
+ BUG_ON(folio_test_writeback(folio));
+ if (!folio_clear_dirty_for_io(folio))
+ return false;
+
+ return true;
+}
+
/**
* write_cache_pages - walk the list of dirty pages of the given address space and write all of them.
* @mapping: address space structure to write
@@ -2462,38 +2492,13 @@ int write_cache_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
wbc->done_index = folio->index;

folio_lock(folio);
-
- /*
- * Page truncated or invalidated. We can freely skip it
- * then, even for data integrity operations: the page
- * has disappeared concurrently, so there could be no
- * real expectation of this data integrity operation
- * even if there is now a new, dirty page at the same
- * pagecache address.
- */
- if (unlikely(folio->mapping != mapping)) {
-continue_unlock:
+ if (!should_writeback_folio(mapping, wbc, folio)) {
folio_unlock(folio);
continue;
}

- if (!folio_test_dirty(folio)) {
- /* someone wrote it for us */
- goto continue_unlock;
- }
-
- if (folio_test_writeback(folio)) {
- if (wbc->sync_mode != WB_SYNC_NONE)
- folio_wait_writeback(folio);
- else
- goto continue_unlock;
- }
-
- BUG_ON(folio_test_writeback(folio));
- if (!folio_clear_dirty_for_io(folio))
- goto continue_unlock;
-
trace_wbc_writepage(wbc, inode_to_bdi(mapping->host));
+
error = writepage(folio, wbc, data);
nr = folio_nr_pages(folio);
if (unlikely(error)) {
--
2.39.2


2023-12-15 14:16:51

by Jan Kara

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] writeback: Factor should_writeback_folio() out of write_cache_pages()

On Thu 14-12-23 14:25:36, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> From: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <[email protected]>
>
> Reduce write_cache_pages() by about 30 lines; much of it is commentary,
> but it all bundles nicely into an obvious function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>

I like this! Feel free to add:

Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>

Honza

> ---
> mm/page-writeback.c | 59 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> index 5d33e7b468e2cc..5a3df8665ff4f9 100644
> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> @@ -2394,6 +2394,36 @@ static void writeback_get_batch(struct address_space *mapping,
> &wbc->fbatch);
> }
>
> +static bool should_writeback_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
> + struct writeback_control *wbc, struct folio *folio)
> +{
> + /*
> + * Folio truncated or invalidated. We can freely skip it then,
> + * even for data integrity operations: the folio has disappeared
> + * concurrently, so there could be no real expectation of this
> + * data integrity operation even if there is now a new, dirty
> + * folio at the same pagecache index.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(folio->mapping != mapping))
> + return false;
> +
> + /* Did somebody write it for us? */
> + if (!folio_test_dirty(folio))
> + return false;
> +
> + if (folio_test_writeback(folio)) {
> + if (wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_NONE)
> + return false;
> + folio_wait_writeback(folio);
> + }
> +
> + BUG_ON(folio_test_writeback(folio));
> + if (!folio_clear_dirty_for_io(folio))
> + return false;
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * write_cache_pages - walk the list of dirty pages of the given address space and write all of them.
> * @mapping: address space structure to write
> @@ -2462,38 +2492,13 @@ int write_cache_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
> wbc->done_index = folio->index;
>
> folio_lock(folio);
> -
> - /*
> - * Page truncated or invalidated. We can freely skip it
> - * then, even for data integrity operations: the page
> - * has disappeared concurrently, so there could be no
> - * real expectation of this data integrity operation
> - * even if there is now a new, dirty page at the same
> - * pagecache address.
> - */
> - if (unlikely(folio->mapping != mapping)) {
> -continue_unlock:
> + if (!should_writeback_folio(mapping, wbc, folio)) {
> folio_unlock(folio);
> continue;
> }
>
> - if (!folio_test_dirty(folio)) {
> - /* someone wrote it for us */
> - goto continue_unlock;
> - }
> -
> - if (folio_test_writeback(folio)) {
> - if (wbc->sync_mode != WB_SYNC_NONE)
> - folio_wait_writeback(folio);
> - else
> - goto continue_unlock;
> - }
> -
> - BUG_ON(folio_test_writeback(folio));
> - if (!folio_clear_dirty_for_io(folio))
> - goto continue_unlock;
> -
> trace_wbc_writepage(wbc, inode_to_bdi(mapping->host));
> +
> error = writepage(folio, wbc, data);
> nr = folio_nr_pages(folio);
> if (unlikely(error)) {
> --
> 2.39.2
>
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR