Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752017AbZCXElm (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:41:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750781AbZCXEl3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:41:29 -0400 Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:45907 "EHLO out2.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750753AbZCXEl2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:41:28 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: 93pXmQwNCE8gJU/g6CEZ0AXkvlVPb8Zev51gvAmDABSi 1237869685 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:41:13 +0900 (WST) From: Ian Kent To: Andrew Morton cc: Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , jens.axboe@oracle.com, Christoph Hellwig , Jeff Layton Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: reset inode dirty time when adding it back to empty s_dirty list In-Reply-To: <1237840233-11045-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <1237840233-11045-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4909 Lines: 108 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 Acked-by: Ian Kent 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/ > -- 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/