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=-8.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable 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 DFC26C433DF for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 02:35:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA190207CB; Wed, 27 May 2020 02:35:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="Llu1VzGt"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="nUKqDcxJ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org AA190207CB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdlv0-0007uC-8q; Wed, 27 May 2020 02:35:46 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdluz-0007u5-1S for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 27 May 2020 02:35:45 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ECvW5mzt381sRa6btTvwKp66UY4TyyiEt3pCB1FSamI=; b=Llu1VzGt4NdUtOMaoTur513RvG 8dcE5fQtJW1mUzzLtWucEeEwkgn4YGX9V4wZgTBGVlAJ4bCHrvAyP4BcSE2x5kRz/Y3E5p76WV9dE rQ1UNX9Ja8ZbWHj3SezsWHBKSlg7LD1uzunB/FGNmI8i6UHRn2qtRHt2G2G1xRGjK8NM=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ECvW5mzt381sRa6btTvwKp66UY4TyyiEt3pCB1FSamI=; b=nUKqDcxJTtLi8hXQ7UkR2aKf/q G6X+vVgIumVUPJ/47Onk74eh1U62gw6HTafqD9xRi7DSB7fzZTb/xQ76HqZPNzLUMVYEkTo61hcCl 5DA/A6I7LUQpk1tAs9ED1SsWbuuOWYDYEl/Vh9/TTpJ/Z8IGfQ4UQgth0nwY9yJqseRU=; Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191] helo=huawei.com) by sfi-mx-3.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1jdluw-00EIuB-Tw for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 27 May 2020 02:35:44 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS404-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 3A84687391F412890586; Wed, 27 May 2020 10:35:36 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.204) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.487.0; Wed, 27 May 2020 10:35:35 +0800 To: Jaegeuk Kim References: <20200522144752.216197-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <20200522233243.GA94020@google.com> <20200525035655.GA135148@google.com> <565af47c-8364-d910-8d1c-93645c12e660@huawei.com> <20200525150608.GA55033@google.com> <92afae8b-2dd3-171a-562c-404a67f9aab2@huawei.com> <20200526015650.GA207949@google.com> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: <765a1ac5-a318-14d6-666f-eab46f892d01@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 10:35:35 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200526015650.GA207949@google.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Headers-End: 1jdluw-00EIuB-Tw Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v3] f2fs: avoid inifinite loop to wait for flushing node pages at cp_error X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net 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. 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 >>>>>> --- >>>>>> 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 >>> . >>> > . > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel