All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>,
	Linux Filesystem Development List 
	<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:34:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200312143445.GA19160@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200312000716.GY10737@dread.disaster.area>

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 11:07:17AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > That's true, but when the timestamps were originally modified,
> > dirty_inode() will be called with flag == I_DIRTY_TIME, which will
> > *not* be a no-op; which is to say, XFS will force the timestamps to be
> > updated on disk when the timestamps are first dirtied, because it
> > doesn't support I_DIRTY_TIME.
> 
> We log the initial timestamp change, and then ignore timestamp
> updates until the dirty time expires and the inode is set
> I_DIRTY_SYNC via __mark_inode_dirty_sync(). IOWs, on expiry, we have
> time stamps that may be 24 hours out of date in memory, and they
> still need to be flushed to the journal.
> 
> However, your change does not mark the inode dirtying on expiry
> anymore, so...
> 
> > So I think we're fine.
> 
> ... we're not fine. This breaks XFS and any other filesystem that
> relies on a I_DIRTY_SYNC notification to handle dirty time expiry
> correctly.

I haven't seen the original mail this replies to, but if we could
get the lazytime expirty by some other means (e.g. an explicit
callback), XFS could opt out of all the VFS inode tracking again,
which would simplify a few things.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>,
	Linux Filesystem Development List <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 07:34:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200312143445.GA19160@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200312000716.GY10737@dread.disaster.area>

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 11:07:17AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > That's true, but when the timestamps were originally modified,
> > dirty_inode() will be called with flag == I_DIRTY_TIME, which will
> > *not* be a no-op; which is to say, XFS will force the timestamps to be
> > updated on disk when the timestamps are first dirtied, because it
> > doesn't support I_DIRTY_TIME.
> 
> We log the initial timestamp change, and then ignore timestamp
> updates until the dirty time expires and the inode is set
> I_DIRTY_SYNC via __mark_inode_dirty_sync(). IOWs, on expiry, we have
> time stamps that may be 24 hours out of date in memory, and they
> still need to be flushed to the journal.
> 
> However, your change does not mark the inode dirtying on expiry
> anymore, so...
> 
> > So I think we're fine.
> 
> ... we're not fine. This breaks XFS and any other filesystem that
> relies on a I_DIRTY_SYNC notification to handle dirty time expiry
> correctly.

I haven't seen the original mail this replies to, but if we could
get the lazytime expirty by some other means (e.g. an explicit
callback), XFS could opt out of all the VFS inode tracking again,
which would simplify a few things.


_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-12 14:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-06  0:45 [f2fs-dev] lazytime causing inodes to remain dirty after sync? Eric Biggers
2020-03-07  2:00 ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-11  3:20   ` Eric Biggers
2020-03-11 12:57     ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-12  0:07       ` Dave Chinner
2020-03-12 14:34         ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2020-03-12 22:39           ` Dave Chinner
2020-03-20  2:46           ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-20  2:52             ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] " Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-20  2:52               ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] writeback, xfs: call dirty_inode() with I_DIRTY_TIME_EXPIRED when appropriate Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-23 17:58                 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-24  8:37                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-24 18:43                     ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-25  9:20               ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-25 15:21                 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-25 15:47                   ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-03-11 23:54     ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] " Dave Chinner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200312143445.GA19160@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.