From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF90EC35677 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:18:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 953E524688 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:18:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="TSuFgnfS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730868AbgB0PS1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:18:27 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.61]:30552 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729652AbgB0PS1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:18:27 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1582816705; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=//5p8H7T6tAW+fdfl1MHeeI5aeOQRtXoVd6PAFlrf9U=; b=TSuFgnfSrvg1+c6eqZe7MTb8MJCXnaDocXDt5/SZtdB7d2GuZcdns30WuXP7xvQoNed1Aa bVKTr+UnaU7xu8EmxVRqcQzKo3PZ42BV5b1qQ6Pd7bSUGjJjcPLO6FjwGj33jr5j/RASuf flXaj/i6IRe6f1PVzyvRIMwM2mTRJV0= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-270-tloleKH6PEe9yxCSGvG7LA-1; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:18:17 -0500 X-MC-Unique: tloleKH6PEe9yxCSGvG7LA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1AD71005F62; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:18:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bfoster (dhcp-41-2.bos.redhat.com [10.18.41.2]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73ABF90767; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:18:16 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:18:14 -0500 From: Brian Foster To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v5 PATCH 0/9] xfs: automatic relogging experiment Message-ID: <20200227151814.GA6320@bfoster> References: <20200227134321.7238-1-bfoster@redhat.com> <20200227150936.GL8045@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200227150936.GL8045@magnolia> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 07:09:36AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 08:43:12AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Here's a v5 RFC of the automatic item relogging experiment. Firstly, > > note that this is still a POC and experimental code with various quirks. > > Heh, funny, I was going to ask you if you might have time next week to > review the latest iteration of the btree bulk loading series so that I > could get closer to merging the rest of online repair and/or refactoring > offline repair. I'll take a closer look at this after I read through > everything else that came in overnight. > Sure.. I can put that next on the list. Is the latest release pending a post or already posted? Being out for over a month (effectively closer to two when considering proximity to the holidays) caused me to pretty much clear everything in my mailbox for obvious reasons. ;) As a result, anything that might have been on my radar prior to that timeframe has most likely dropped completely off it. :P Brian > --D > > > Some are documented in the code, others might not be (such as abusing > > the AIL lock, etc.). The primary purpose of this series is still to > > express and review a fundamental design. Based on discussion on the last > > version, there is specific focus towards addressing log reservation and > > pre-item locking deadlock vectors. While the code is still quite hacky, > > I believe this design addresses both of those fundamental issues. > > Further details on the design and approach are documented in the > > individual commit logs. > > > > In addition, the final few patches introduce buffer relogging capability > > and test infrastructure, which currently has no use case other than to > > demonstrate development flexibility and the ability to support arbitrary > > log items in the future, if ever desired. If this approach is taken > > forward, the current use cases are still centered around intent items > > such as the quotaoff use case and extent freeing use case defined by > > online repair of free space trees. > > > > On somewhat of a tangent, another intent oriented use case idea crossed > > my mind recently related to the long standing writeback stale data > > exposure problem (i.e. if we crash after a delalloc extent is converted > > but before writeback fully completes on the extent). The obvious > > approach of using unwritten extents has been rebuffed due to performance > > concerns over extent conversion. I wonder if we had the ability to log a > > "writeback pending" intent on some reasonable level of granularity (i.e. > > something between a block and extent), whether we could use that to > > allow log recovery to zero (or convert) such extents in the event of a > > crash. This is a whole separate design discussion, however, as it > > involves tracking outstanding writeback, etc. In this context it simply > > serves as a prospective use case for relogging, as such intents would > > otherwise risk similar log subsystem deadlocks as the quotaoff use case. > > > > Thoughts, reviews, flames appreciated. > > > > Brian > > > > rfcv5: > > - More fleshed out design to prevent log reservation deadlock and > > locking problems. > > - Split out core patches between pre-reservation management, relog item > > state management and relog mechanism. > > - Added experimental buffer relogging capability. > > rfcv4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191205175037.52529-1-bfoster@redhat.com/ > > - AIL based approach. > > rfcv3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191125185523.47556-1-bfoster@redhat.com/ > > - CIL based approach. > > rfcv2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191122181927.32870-1-bfoster@redhat.com/ > > - Different approach based on workqueue and transaction rolling. > > rfc: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191024172850.7698-1-bfoster@redhat.com/ > > > > Brian Foster (9): > > xfs: set t_task at wait time instead of alloc time > > xfs: introduce ->tr_relog transaction > > xfs: automatic relogging reservation management > > xfs: automatic relogging item management > > xfs: automatic log item relog mechanism > > xfs: automatically relog the quotaoff start intent > > xfs: buffer relogging support prototype > > xfs: create an error tag for random relog reservation > > xfs: relog random buffers based on errortag > > > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_errortag.h | 4 +- > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_shared.h | 1 + > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_resv.c | 24 +++- > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_resv.h | 1 + > > fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c | 5 + > > fs/xfs/xfs_dquot_item.c | 7 ++ > > fs/xfs/xfs_error.c | 3 + > > fs/xfs/xfs_log.c | 2 +- > > fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c | 12 +- > > fs/xfs/xfs_trace.h | 3 + > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c | 79 +++++++++++- > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans.h | 13 +- > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans_ail.c | 216 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans_buf.c | 35 ++++++ > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans_priv.h | 6 + > > 15 files changed, 399 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 2.21.1 > > >