Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDCB1C433F5 for ; Sat, 8 Jan 2022 02:09:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233297AbiAHCJV (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jan 2022 21:09:21 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33188 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233295AbiAHCJU (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jan 2022 21:09:20 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EEEFC06173E for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2022 18:09:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id bp20so21888057lfb.6 for ; Fri, 07 Jan 2022 18:09:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bytedance-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qiJhbJ2aBb0qjBsuYYXGsPdSValv1YALN0zVHkP+alM=; b=Ao9/bWL/zwovU6cqVd0D/MyCY9g/soKUG8w1vXWmgtMEaMZ9kFXEn3SRMfjD6NyqkY xaxh8oBp4Y//AQI8VP/givvyZ6zDFWverkWH8zlm1QIWSIidBkT2mt1LRX4YJy/ohk3V bSvtBko1RljiO8peu5OJ6eo5/2lE7nQ7pxXwDVCr2OgumG7Li6LQZHv2qeiQF3TMGeqw 8qaPa31xjTKWs8yv23Sdih+SWF4WNDjHuxKt+wCogdyAP1pXMt3gmwUGq5NC9ZRy6jrb 9+hIghar6fV5WI792xtboJSFIwT63rWfPx98KMB7XiM3adDJs8VeiR0KMye+axg2db9F gukg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qiJhbJ2aBb0qjBsuYYXGsPdSValv1YALN0zVHkP+alM=; b=6xR/GwCo2j5E6Sj3YKLdIcZpdhXasiPO39rMxsD+0HSPTMpyMYwAlFWkgiPlbyxGVi AgGZLEbjpe58+wpEYcv11wZSD9s/RNuCTgmYC2/Lp46hHMIBfhYfhDFlrB68H09kegBz RiX+98AzLaPZGbQGzksPZxxLO2q+0HMYRUZuKpxN91pvgR3Q/BF71B6f4DIQVqJ0b1G5 1L2sxRLXjsbQchEybzhuIN5wduZh7Jv+Yczx8+FPHD6THXFG/ATqzw2z6FfhxRdAwdkO QNq2P5U0KRxaTCGfCEnGFs6NvPGKYH/6Y28NIjO3DyqJLzXY6HV43ZjjwnE/C+lbz3Pa v8Lw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Q0/fQSv9t5H7iIiSz9nah6qgwwJ9Nk+YiMJEU1glD2yit39SI +XQIc/qpwdeqIoo0OYXquE2iST2wuZTdf8JndoVyow== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz3ZuvzjB2Xxxx0jSq9TUC7Q0ZpjgD4pH0JDWwhTXG+Zxp1GJQ3xtrXXGN940Nb2qNqjlUQmtW1tymGSOlgdr4= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4895:: with SMTP id x21mr58793403lfc.336.1641607758305; Fri, 07 Jan 2022 18:09:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220106024518.8161-1-yinxin.x@bytedance.com> <20220106024518.8161-2-yinxin.x@bytedance.com> In-Reply-To: From: Xin Yin Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2022 10:09:06 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH 1/2] ext4: prevent used blocks from being allocated during fast commit replay To: harshad shirwadkar Cc: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Andreas Dilger , Ext4 Developers List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 4:26 AM harshad shirwadkar wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 6:45 PM Xin Yin wrote: > > > > during fast commit replay procedure, we clear inode blocks bitmap in > > ext4_ext_clear_bb(), this may cause ext4_mb_new_blocks_simple() allocate > > blocks still in use. > > > > make ext4_fc_record_regions() also record physical disk regions used by > > inodes during replay procedure. Then ext4_mb_new_blocks_simple() can > > excludes these blocks in use. > > > > Signed-off-by: Xin Yin > > --- > > fs/ext4/ext4.h | 2 ++ > > fs/ext4/extents.c | 4 ++++ > > fs/ext4/fast_commit.c | 11 ++++++++--- > > 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h > > index 82fa51d6f145..7b0686758691 100644 > > --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h > > +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h > > @@ -2932,6 +2932,8 @@ bool ext4_fc_replay_check_excluded(struct super_block *sb, ext4_fsblk_t block); > > void ext4_fc_replay_cleanup(struct super_block *sb); > > int ext4_fc_commit(journal_t *journal, tid_t commit_tid); > > int __init ext4_fc_init_dentry_cache(void); > > +int ext4_fc_record_regions(struct super_block *sb, int ino, > > + ext4_lblk_t lblk, ext4_fsblk_t pblk, int len, int replay); > > > > /* mballoc.c */ > > extern const struct seq_operations ext4_mb_seq_groups_ops; > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c > > index c3e76a5de661..9b6c76629c93 100644 > > --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c > > +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c > > @@ -6096,11 +6096,15 @@ int ext4_ext_clear_bb(struct inode *inode) > > > > ext4_mb_mark_bb(inode->i_sb, > > path[j].p_block, 1, 0); > > + ext4_fc_record_regions(inode->i_sb, inode->i_ino, > > + 0, path[j].p_block, 1, 1); > > } > > ext4_ext_drop_refs(path); > > kfree(path); > > } > > ext4_mb_mark_bb(inode->i_sb, map.m_pblk, map.m_len, 0); > > + ext4_fc_record_regions(inode->i_sb, inode->i_ino, > > + map.m_lblk, map.m_pblk, map.m_len, 1); > > } > > cur = cur + map.m_len; > > } > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c b/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c > > index 23d13983a281..f0cd20f5fe5e 100644 > > --- a/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c > > +++ b/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c > > @@ -1567,13 +1567,15 @@ static int ext4_fc_replay_create(struct super_block *sb, struct ext4_fc_tl *tl, > > * Record physical disk regions which are in use as per fast commit area. Our > > * simple replay phase allocator excludes these regions from allocation. > > */ > > -static int ext4_fc_record_regions(struct super_block *sb, int ino, > > - ext4_lblk_t lblk, ext4_fsblk_t pblk, int len) > > +int ext4_fc_record_regions(struct super_block *sb, int ino, > > + ext4_lblk_t lblk, ext4_fsblk_t pblk, int len, int replay) > Can you explain a bit why this replay parameter is needed here? This > function simply reallocs the regions array if it doesn't have enough > space. I am not sure why we need to change that behavior. ext4_fc_record_regions() originally only used during scan phase, and set fc_regions_valid = fc_regions_use when getting a TAIL tag. Now we also use it during the replay phase, and need to update fc_regions_valid in this case, because ext4_fc_replay_check_excluded() uses fc_regions_valid for regions checking. Please correct me if I'm wrong. > > { > > struct ext4_fc_replay_state *state; > > struct ext4_fc_alloc_region *region; > > > > state = &EXT4_SB(sb)->s_fc_replay_state; > > + if (replay && state->fc_regions_used != state->fc_regions_valid) > > + state->fc_regions_used = state->fc_regions_valid; > > if (state->fc_regions_used == state->fc_regions_size) { > > state->fc_regions_size += > > EXT4_FC_REPLAY_REALLOC_INCREMENT; > > @@ -1591,6 +1593,9 @@ static int ext4_fc_record_regions(struct super_block *sb, int ino, > > region->pblk = pblk; > > region->len = len; > > > > + if (replay) > > + state->fc_regions_valid++; > > + > > return 0; > > } > > > > @@ -1938,7 +1943,7 @@ static int ext4_fc_replay_scan(journal_t *journal, > > ret = ext4_fc_record_regions(sb, > > le32_to_cpu(ext.fc_ino), > > le32_to_cpu(ex->ee_block), ext4_ext_pblock(ex), > > - ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ex)); > > + ext4_ext_get_actual_len(ex), 0); > > if (ret < 0) > > break; > > ret = JBD2_FC_REPLAY_CONTINUE; > > -- > > 2.20.1 > >