From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.129]:49061 "EHLO ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753817AbeDTAJv (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Apr 2018 20:09:51 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 10:07:16 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] xfs: superblock scrub should use uncached buffers Message-ID: <20180420000716.GT23861@dastard> References: <152401916729.11465.4212188839231900136.stgit@magnolia> <152401922015.11465.14941366292853283272.stgit@magnolia> <20180419125546.GA25844@bfoster.bfoster> <20180419172548.GY24738@magnolia> <20180419185723.GA26938@bfoster.bfoster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180419185723.GA26938@bfoster.bfoster> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Brian Foster Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 02:57:23PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:25:48AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 08:55:47AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:40:20PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > From: Darrick J. Wong > > > > > > > > We've never cached buffers when reading or writing superblocks, so we > > > > need to change scrub to do likewise or risk screwing up the uncached sb > > > > buffer usage everywhere else. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong > > > > --- > > > > > > Hmm, so this goes back to this[1] thread, right? > > > > Yep. > > > > > IIRC, we wanted to end up with an lru-bypassing uncached buffer lookup > > > mechanism to provide uncached behavior for resource-saving purposes > > > but without introducing serialization issues between multiple users of > > > uncached buffers. > > > > Right. > > > > > On a quick look back, growfs currently uses cached buffers for secondary > > > superblocks and the associated patch was looking to change that to > > > something like the above. Don't we have the same requirement here (since > > > growfs currently still uses cached buffers)? > > > > Correct, this patch is contingent on landing Dave's "tableise growfs" > > series that converts growfs to use uncached buffers for writing out the > > new secondary supers. If I manage to land Dave's growfs thing before > > repair then I'll keep this; if repair goes first I'll defer it to that > > series. > > > > Ok, though I'm not sure I see the need for the higher level series > dependency. Don't one of these patches just need to fold in a helper[1] > to set the lru reference appropriately and start to use it? Yes, that would work. :P Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com