Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v3] f2fs: avoid inifinite loop to wait for flushing node pages at cp_error | From | Chao Yu <> | Date | Thu, 28 May 2020 09:20:37 +0800 |
| |
On 2020/5/28 4:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 05/27, Chao Yu wrote: >> On 2020/5/26 9:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> On 05/26, Chao Yu wrote: >>>> On 2020/5/26 9:11, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>> On 2020/5/25 23:06, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>> On 05/25, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>> On 2020/5/25 11:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>>> Shutdown test is somtimes hung, since it keeps trying to flush dirty node pages >> >> 71.07% 0.01% kworker/u256:1+ [kernel.kallsyms] [k] wb_writeback >> | >> --71.06%--wb_writeback >> | >> |--68.96%--__writeback_inodes_wb >> | | >> | --68.95%--writeback_sb_inodes >> | | >> | |--65.08%--__writeback_single_inode >> | | | >> | | --64.35%--do_writepages >> | | | >> | | |--59.83%--f2fs_write_node_pages >> | | | | >> | | | --59.74%--f2fs_sync_node_pages >> | | | | >> | | | |--27.91%--pagevec_lookup_range_tag >> | | | | | >> | | | | --27.90%--find_get_pages_range_tag >> >> Before umount, kworker will always hold one core, that looks not reasonable, >> to avoid that, could we just allow node write, since it's out-place-update, >> and cp is not allowed, we don't need to worry about its effect on data on >> previous checkpoint, and it can decrease memory footprint cost by node pages. > > It can cause some roll-forward recovery?
Yup, recovery should be considered,
Later fsync() will fail due to:
int f2fs_sync_file(struct file *file, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync) { if (unlikely(f2fs_cp_error(F2FS_I_SB(file_inode(file))))) return -EIO;
And we need to adjust f2fs_fsync_node_pages() to handle in-process fsyncing node pages as well:
if (f2fs_cp_error()) { set_fsync_mark(page, 0); set_dentry_mark(page, 0); if (atomic) { unlock & put page; ret = -EIO; break; } }
ret = __write_node_page();
Thanks,
> >> >> Thanks, >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMO, for umount case, we should drop dirty reference and dirty pages on meta/data >>>>>>> pages like we change for node pages to avoid potential dead loop... >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe we're doing for them. :P >>>>> >>>>> Actually, I mean do we need to drop dirty meta/data pages explicitly as below: >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c >>>>> index 3dc3ac6fe143..4c08fd0a680a 100644 >>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c >>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c >>>>> @@ -299,8 +299,15 @@ static int __f2fs_write_meta_page(struct page *page, >>>>> >>>>> trace_f2fs_writepage(page, META); >>>>> >>>>> - if (unlikely(f2fs_cp_error(sbi))) >>>>> + if (unlikely(f2fs_cp_error(sbi))) { >>>>> + if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_IS_CLOSE)) { >>>>> + ClearPageUptodate(page); >>>>> + dec_page_count(sbi, F2FS_DIRTY_META); >>>>> + unlock_page(page); >>>>> + return 0; >>>>> + } >>>>> goto redirty_out; >>>>> + } >>>>> if (unlikely(is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_POR_DOING))) >>>>> goto redirty_out; >>>>> if (wbc->for_reclaim && page->index < GET_SUM_BLOCK(sbi, 0)) >>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c >>>>> index 48a622b95b76..94b342802513 100644 >>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c >>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c >>>>> @@ -2682,6 +2682,12 @@ int f2fs_write_single_data_page(struct page *page, int *submitted, >>>>> >>>>> /* we should bypass data pages to proceed the kworkder jobs */ >>>>> if (unlikely(f2fs_cp_error(sbi))) { >>>>> + if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_IS_CLOSE)) { >>>>> + ClearPageUptodate(page); >>>>> + inode_dec_dirty_pages(inode); >>>>> + unlock_page(page); >>>>> + return 0; >>>>> + } >>>> >>>> Oh, I notice previously, we will drop non-directory inode's dirty pages directly, >>>> however, during umount, we'd better drop directory inode's dirty pages as well, right? >>> >>> Hmm, I remember I dropped them before. Need to double check. >>> >>>> >>>>> mapping_set_error(page->mapping, -EIO); >>>>> /* >>>>> * don't drop any dirty dentry pages for keeping lastest >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> in an inifinite loop. Let's drop dirty pages at umount in that case. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> v3: >>>>>>>> - fix wrong unlock >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v2: >>>>>>>> - fix typos >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/node.c | 9 ++++++++- >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/node.c b/fs/f2fs/node.c >>>>>>>> index e632de10aedab..e0bb0f7e0506e 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c >>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c >>>>>>>> @@ -1520,8 +1520,15 @@ static int __write_node_page(struct page *page, bool atomic, bool *submitted, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> trace_f2fs_writepage(page, NODE); >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - if (unlikely(f2fs_cp_error(sbi))) >>>>>>>> + if (unlikely(f2fs_cp_error(sbi))) { >>>>>>>> + if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_IS_CLOSE)) { >>>>>>>> + ClearPageUptodate(page); >>>>>>>> + dec_page_count(sbi, F2FS_DIRTY_NODES); >>>>>>>> + unlock_page(page); >>>>>>>> + return 0; >>>>>>>> + } >>>>>>>> goto redirty_out; >>>>>>>> + } >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> if (unlikely(is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_POR_DOING))) >>>>>>>> goto redirty_out; >>>>>>>> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list >>>>> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel >>>>> . >>>>> >>> . >>> > . >
| |