From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com> To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>, Guoqing Jiang <guoqing.jiang@linux.dev>, Sachin Sant <sachinp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [powerpc][5.13.0-next-20210701] Kernel crash while running ltp(chdir01) tests Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2021 11:05:07 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <36778615-86fd-9a19-9bc9-f93a6f2d5817@huawei.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <YN86yl5kgVaRixxQ@mit.edu> On 2021/7/3 0:11, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 09:52:13PM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote: >> >> Sorry about not catching this problem, this fix is not format corrected, >> if you think this fix is OK, I can send a patch after test. > > The issue I see with your approach, which removes the > jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() call from jbd2_destsroy_journal(), > is that means that *all* callers of jbd2_destroy_journal now have to > be responsible for calling jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() --- and > there a number of call sites to jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker(): > > fs/ext4/super.c: err = jbd2_journal_destroy(sbi->s_journal); > fs/ext4/super.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(sbi->s_journal); > fs/ext4/super.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > fs/ext4/super.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > fs/ext4/super.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > fs/ocfs2/journal.c: if (!jbd2_journal_destroy(journal->j_journal) && !status) { > fs/ocfs2/journal.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > fs/ocfs2/journal.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > Originally, I want to add this shrinker as a optional feature for jbd2 because only ext4 use it now and I'm not sure does ocfs2 needs this feature. So I export jbd2_journal_[un]register_shrinker(), ext4 could invoke them individually. If with my fix, there is no responsible for calling jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() before every jbd2_journal_destroy(). There are only two places that need to do this, one is the error path after ext4_load_journal() because we have already register the shrinker, other one is in ext4_put_super() before the final release of the journal. jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() and jbd2_journal_destroy() do not have the strong dependence. And one more thing we to could do is rename the 'j_jh_shrink_count' to something like 'j_checkpoint_jh_count' because we always init it no matter we register the shrinker or not later. > So it probably makes more sense to keep jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() > in jbd2_destroy_journal(), since arguably the fact that we are using a > shrinker is an internal implementation detail, and the users of jbd2 > ideally shouldn't need to be expected to know they have unregister > jbd2's shirnkers. > > Similarly, perhaps we should be moving jbd2_journal_register_shirnker() > into jbd2_journal_init_common(). We can un-export the register and > unshrink register functions, and declare them as static functions internal > to fs/jbd2/journal.c. > Yeah, it's make sense and It's sound good to me if the shrinker doesn't have side effects on osfs2. Thanks, Yi.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com> To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> Cc: Sachin Sant <sachinp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Guoqing Jiang <guoqing.jiang@linux.dev>, "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [powerpc][5.13.0-next-20210701] Kernel crash while running ltp(chdir01) tests Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2021 11:05:07 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <36778615-86fd-9a19-9bc9-f93a6f2d5817@huawei.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <YN86yl5kgVaRixxQ@mit.edu> On 2021/7/3 0:11, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 09:52:13PM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote: >> >> Sorry about not catching this problem, this fix is not format corrected, >> if you think this fix is OK, I can send a patch after test. > > The issue I see with your approach, which removes the > jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() call from jbd2_destsroy_journal(), > is that means that *all* callers of jbd2_destroy_journal now have to > be responsible for calling jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() --- and > there a number of call sites to jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker(): > > fs/ext4/super.c: err = jbd2_journal_destroy(sbi->s_journal); > fs/ext4/super.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(sbi->s_journal); > fs/ext4/super.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > fs/ext4/super.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > fs/ext4/super.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > fs/ocfs2/journal.c: if (!jbd2_journal_destroy(journal->j_journal) && !status) { > fs/ocfs2/journal.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > fs/ocfs2/journal.c: jbd2_journal_destroy(journal); > Originally, I want to add this shrinker as a optional feature for jbd2 because only ext4 use it now and I'm not sure does ocfs2 needs this feature. So I export jbd2_journal_[un]register_shrinker(), ext4 could invoke them individually. If with my fix, there is no responsible for calling jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() before every jbd2_journal_destroy(). There are only two places that need to do this, one is the error path after ext4_load_journal() because we have already register the shrinker, other one is in ext4_put_super() before the final release of the journal. jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() and jbd2_journal_destroy() do not have the strong dependence. And one more thing we to could do is rename the 'j_jh_shrink_count' to something like 'j_checkpoint_jh_count' because we always init it no matter we register the shrinker or not later. > So it probably makes more sense to keep jbd2_journal_unregister_shrinker() > in jbd2_destroy_journal(), since arguably the fact that we are using a > shrinker is an internal implementation detail, and the users of jbd2 > ideally shouldn't need to be expected to know they have unregister > jbd2's shirnkers. > > Similarly, perhaps we should be moving jbd2_journal_register_shirnker() > into jbd2_journal_init_common(). We can un-export the register and > unshrink register functions, and declare them as static functions internal > to fs/jbd2/journal.c. > Yeah, it's make sense and It's sound good to me if the shrinker doesn't have side effects on osfs2. Thanks, Yi.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-03 3:05 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-07-02 8:51 [powerpc][5.13.0-next-20210701] Kernel crash while running ltp(chdir01) tests Sachin Sant 2021-07-02 8:51 ` Sachin Sant 2021-07-02 9:38 ` Guoqing Jiang 2021-07-02 9:38 ` Guoqing Jiang 2021-07-02 13:13 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-02 13:13 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-02 13:23 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-02 13:23 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-02 13:52 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-02 13:52 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-02 16:11 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-02 16:11 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-02 22:11 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-02 22:11 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-03 3:37 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-03 3:37 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-03 3:52 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-03 3:52 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-03 3:05 ` Zhang Yi [this message] 2021-07-03 3:05 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-03 3:35 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-03 3:35 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-03 4:55 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-03 4:55 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-04 14:04 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-04 14:04 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-05 2:17 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-05 2:17 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-05 14:50 ` [PATCH -v2] ext4: inline jbd2_journal_[un]register_shrinker() Theodore Ts'o 2021-07-05 18:29 ` Jon Hunter 2021-07-06 1:38 ` Zhang Yi 2021-07-05 9:58 ` [powerpc][5.13.0-next-20210701] Kernel crash while running ltp(chdir01) tests Jan Kara 2021-07-05 9:58 ` Jan Kara 2021-07-05 11:27 ` Sachin Sant 2021-07-05 11:27 ` Sachin Sant
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=36778615-86fd-9a19-9bc9-f93a6f2d5817@huawei.com \ --to=yi.zhang@huawei.com \ --cc=guoqing.jiang@linux.dev \ --cc=jack@suse.cz \ --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \ --cc=sachinp@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ --cc=tytso@mit.edu \ /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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.