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=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 1C369C433DF for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 20:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E729120890 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 20:56:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1590612965; bh=CZnp1dPscHvgEsASP4rO6RwpRosxd5cli/BtqtDHsvg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=svCD0Sq7sb5n3o6sReodOasnE8vd5BEovFw5vzwPtK3M9QTgMyNfwI9cr3KssbcVv fehcsO2hxs304vXTsOn3oKHv3oLN3HHbgjDYF3ilBabQdOGXRg/OSO9tmtl52UH1Gy pV6LIIEgV9Mm9kDJN1UWpI4iD6RMA3bYRr8bGDzs= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728707AbgE0U4F (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 16:56:05 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:57286 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726129AbgE0U4E (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 16:56:04 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [104.132.1.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EB7EA2088E; Wed, 27 May 2020 20:56:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1590612964; bh=CZnp1dPscHvgEsASP4rO6RwpRosxd5cli/BtqtDHsvg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=h7dJMVmocSOm/m0XBFdUcedmtZdF03oRbNVu4aLVC37xHlvKTqCnNB0YS6INeGVwr febkhyUGGwleQp5IIoEpKmcd7LHkdMLMyY7yNwrODe1+2GZRirg4lK7M6+77+sZadx sGYaa13HokZGZGXzo59VeQdJcQ0Rf79KqRtu0OTM= Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 13:56:03 -0700 From: Jaegeuk Kim To: Chao Yu Cc: kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v3] f2fs: avoid inifinite loop to wait for flushing node pages at cp_error Message-ID: <20200527205603.GB206249@google.com> 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> <765a1ac5-a318-14d6-666f-eab46f892d01@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <765a1ac5-a318-14d6-666f-eab46f892d01@huawei.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/27, Chao Yu wrote: > 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. It can cause some roll-forward recovery? > > 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 > >>> . > >>> > > . > >