Date:	Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:58:08 -0700
From:	Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>
To:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	tytso@....edu, sandeen@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH updated] ext4: Handle page without buffers in
	ext4_*_writepage()


On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 15:36 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> From: Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> It can happen that buffers are removed from the page before it gets
> marked dirty and then is passed to writepage(). In writepage()
> we just initialize the buffers and check whether they are mapped and non
> delay. If they are mapped and non delay we write the page. Otherwise we
> mark then dirty. With this change we don't do block allocation at all in
> ext4_*_write_page.

Probably should update the mpage_da_map_blocks() in mpage.c to indicate
that the failure of block allocation in da_writepages() are no longer
deferred to ext4_da_writepage(), as with this change we just simply
re-dirty the page later in ext4_da_writepage()

> 
> writepage() get called under many condition and with a locking order
> of journal_start -> lock_page we shouldnot try to allocate blocks in
> writepage() which get called after taking page lock. writepage can get
> called via shrink_page_list even with a journal handle which was created
> for doing inode update. For example when doing ext4_da_write_begin we
> create a journal handle with credit 1 expecting a i_disksize update for
> the inode. But ext4_da_write_begin can cause shrink_page_list via
> _grab_page_cache. So having a valid handle via ext4_journal_current_handle
> is not a guarantee that we can use the handle for block allocation in
> writepage. We should not be using credits which are taken for other updates.
> That would result in we running out of credits when we update inodes.
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  fs/ext4/inode.c |  169 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>  1 files changed, 124 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> index cd5c165..18af94a 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> @@ -1591,11 +1591,15 @@ static int ext4_da_get_block_write(struct inode *inode, sector_t iblock,
>  	handle_t *handle = NULL;
> 
>  	handle = ext4_journal_current_handle();
> -	BUG_ON(handle == NULL);
> -	BUG_ON(create == 0);
> -
> -	ret = ext4_get_blocks_wrap(handle, inode, iblock, max_blocks,
> +	if (!handle) {
> +		ret = ext4_get_blocks_wrap(handle, inode, iblock, max_blocks,
> +				   bh_result, 0, 0, 0);
> +		BUG_ON(!ret);
> +	} else {
> +		ret = ext4_get_blocks_wrap(handle, inode, iblock, max_blocks,
>  				   bh_result, create, 0, EXT4_DELALLOC_RSVED);
> +	}
> +
>  	if (ret > 0) {
>  		bh_result->b_size = (ret << inode->i_blkbits);
> 

With this set of changes (that ext4_da_get_block_write() no longer
called from ext4_da_writepage()), would it still possible to calling
ext4_da_get_block_write() without a journal handle?

> @@ -1633,15 +1637,37 @@ static int ext4_da_get_block_write(struct inode *inode, sector_t iblock,
> 
>  static int ext4_bh_unmapped_or_delay(handle_t *handle, struct buffer_head *bh)
>  {
> -	return !buffer_mapped(bh) || buffer_delay(bh);
> +	/*
> +	 * unmapped buffer is possible for holes.
> +	 * delay buffer is possible with delayed allocation
> +	 */
> +	return ((!buffer_mapped(bh) || buffer_delay(bh)) && buffer_dirty(bh));
> +}
> +
> +static int ext4_normal_get_block_write(struct inode *inode, sector_t iblock,
> +				   struct buffer_head *bh_result, int create)
> +{
> +	int ret = 0;
> +	unsigned max_blocks = bh_result->b_size >> inode->i_blkbits;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * we don't want to do block allocation in writepage
> +	 * so call get_block_wrap with create = 0
> +	 */
> +	ret = ext4_get_blocks_wrap(NULL, inode, iblock, max_blocks,
> +				   bh_result, 0, 0, 0);
> +	if (ret > 0) {
> +		bh_result->b_size = (ret << inode->i_blkbits);
> +		ret = 0;
> +	}
> +	return ret;
>  }
> 

Here we pass create = 0 to get_block all the time in ext4_**_writepage()
all the time. Just wondering what about writeout those unwritten
extents(preallocated extent) to disk? We need to pass create=1 to
convert it to initialized extent and do proper split if needed.  Does
this convertion/split get done via ext4_da_get_block_write() from
ext4_da_writepages()? 

>  /*
> - * get called vi ext4_da_writepages after taking page lock
> - * We may end up doing block allocation here in case
> - * mpage_da_map_blocks failed to allocate blocks.
> - *
> - * We also get called via journal_submit_inode_data_buffers
> + * get called vi ext4_da_writepages after taking page lock (have journal handle)
> + * get called via journal_submit_inode_data_buffers (no journal handle)
> + * get called via shrink_page_list via pdflush (no journal handle)
> + * or grab_page_cache when doing write_begin (have journal handle)
>   */
>  static int ext4_da_writepage(struct page *page,
>  				struct writeback_control *wbc)
> @@ -1649,37 +1675,61 @@ static int ext4_da_writepage(struct page *page,
>  	int ret = 0;
>  	loff_t size;
>  	unsigned long len;
> -	handle_t *handle = NULL;
>  	struct buffer_head *page_bufs;
>  	struct inode *inode = page->mapping->host;
> 
> -	handle = ext4_journal_current_handle();
> -	if (!handle) {
> -		/*
> -		 * This can happen when we aren't called via
> -		 * ext4_da_writepages() but directly (shrink_page_list).
> -		 * We cannot easily start a transaction here so we just skip
> -		 * writing the page in case we would have to do so.
> -		 * We reach here also via journal_submit_inode_data_buffers
> -		 */
> -		size = i_size_read(inode);
> +	size = i_size_read(inode);
> +	if (page->index == size >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT)
> +		len = size & ~PAGE_CACHE_MASK;
> +	else
> +		len = PAGE_CACHE_SIZE;
> 
> +	if (page_has_buffers(page)) {
>  		page_bufs = page_buffers(page);
> -		if (page->index == size >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT)
> -			len = size & ~PAGE_CACHE_MASK;
> -		else
> -			len = PAGE_CACHE_SIZE;
> -
> -		if (walk_page_buffers(NULL, page_bufs, 0,
> -				len, NULL, ext4_bh_unmapped_or_delay)) {
> +		if (walk_page_buffers(NULL, page_bufs, 0, len, NULL,
> +					ext4_bh_unmapped_or_delay)) {
>  			/*
> -			 * We can't do block allocation under
> -			 * page lock without a handle . So redirty
> -			 * the page and return
> +			 * We don't want to do  block allocation
> +			 * So redirty the page and return
>  			 * We may reach here when we do a journal commit
>  			 * via journal_submit_inode_data_buffers.
>  			 * If we don't have mapping block we just ignore
> -			 * them
> +			 * them. We can also reach here via shrink_page_list
> +			 */
> +			redirty_page_for_writepage(wbc, page);
> +			unlock_page(page);
> +			return 0;
> +		}
> +	} else {
> +		/*
> +		 * The test for page_has_buffers() is subtle:
> +		 * We know the page is dirty but it lost buffers. That means
> +		 * that at some moment in time after write_begin()/write_end()
> +		 * has been called all buffers have been clean and thus they
> +		 * must have been written at least once. So they are all
> +		 * mapped and we can happily proceed with mapping them
> +		 * and writing the page.
> +		 *
> +		 * Try to initialize the buffer_heads and check whether
> +		 * all are mapped and non delay. We don't want to
> +		 * do block allocation here.
> +		 */
> +		ret = block_prepare_write(page, 0, PAGE_CACHE_SIZE,
> +						ext4_normal_get_block_write);
> +		if (!ret) {
> +			page_bufs = page_buffers(page);
> +			/* check whether all are mapped and non delay */
> +			if (walk_page_buffers(NULL, page_bufs, 0, len, NULL,
> +						ext4_bh_unmapped_or_delay)) {
> +				redirty_page_for_writepage(wbc, page);
> +				unlock_page(page);
> +				return 0;
> +			}
> +		} else {
> +			/*
> +			 * We can't do block allocation here
> +			 * so just redity the page and unlock
> +			 * and return
>  			 */
>  			redirty_page_for_writepage(wbc, page);
>  			unlock_page(page);
> @@ -1688,9 +1738,11 @@ static int ext4_da_writepage(struct page *page,
>  	}
> 
>  	if (test_opt(inode->i_sb, NOBH) && ext4_should_writeback_data(inode))
> -		ret = nobh_writepage(page, ext4_da_get_block_write, wbc);
> +		ret = nobh_writepage(page, ext4_normal_get_block_write, wbc);
>  	else
> -		ret = block_write_full_page(page, ext4_da_get_block_write, wbc);
> +		ret = block_write_full_page(page,
> +						ext4_normal_get_block_write,
> +						wbc);
> 
>  	return ret;
>  }
> @@ -2031,12 +2083,14 @@ static int __ext4_normal_writepage(struct page *page,
>  	struct inode *inode = page->mapping->host;
> 
>  	if (test_opt(inode->i_sb, NOBH))
> -		return nobh_writepage(page, ext4_get_block, wbc);
> +		return nobh_writepage(page,
> +					ext4_normal_get_block_write, wbc);
>  	else
> -		return block_write_full_page(page, ext4_get_block, wbc);
> +		return block_write_full_page(page,
> +						ext4_normal_get_block_write,
> +						wbc);
>  }
> 

I am wondering how does non-delayed ordered mode handling initialization
the unwritten extent here, with about change that does not pass create =
1 to underlying ext4_get_block_wrap()? 

Also a little puzzled why we need to fix here for non-delayed allocation
writepage(): blocks are all allocated at prepare_write() time, with
page_mkwrite this is also true for mmaped IO. So we shouldn't get into
the case that we need to do block allocation in ext4_normal_writepage()
called from non-delayed path?
> 
> -
>  static int ext4_normal_writepage(struct page *page,
>  				struct writeback_control *wbc)
>  {
> @@ -2045,13 +2099,24 @@ static int ext4_normal_writepage(struct page *page,
>  	loff_t len;
> 
>  	J_ASSERT(PageLocked(page));
> -	J_ASSERT(page_has_buffers(page));
>  	if (page->index == size >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT)
>  		len = size & ~PAGE_CACHE_MASK;
>  	else
>  		len = PAGE_CACHE_SIZE;
> -	BUG_ON(walk_page_buffers(NULL, page_buffers(page), 0, len, NULL,
> -				 ext4_bh_unmapped_or_delay));
> +
> +	if (page_has_buffers(page)) {
> +		/* if page has buffers it should all be mapped
> +		 * and allocated. If there are not buffers attached
> +		 * to the page we know the page is dirty but it lost
> +		 * buffers. That means that at some moment in time
> +		 * after write_begin() / write_end() has been called
> +		 * all buffers have been clean and thus they must have been
> +		 * written at least once. So they are all mapped and we can
> +		 * happily proceed with mapping them and writing the page.
> +		 */
> +		BUG_ON(walk_page_buffers(NULL, page_buffers(page), 0, len, NULL,
> +					ext4_bh_unmapped_or_delay));
> +	}
> 
>  	if (!ext4_journal_current_handle())
>  		return __ext4_normal_writepage(page, wbc);
> @@ -2071,7 +2136,8 @@ static int __ext4_journalled_writepage(struct page *page,
>  	int ret = 0;
>  	int err;
> 
> -	ret = block_prepare_write(page, 0, PAGE_CACHE_SIZE, ext4_get_block);
> +	ret = block_prepare_write(page, 0, PAGE_CACHE_SIZE,
> +					ext4_normal_get_block_write);
>  	if (ret != 0)
>  		goto out_unlock;
> 
> @@ -2118,13 +2184,24 @@ static int ext4_journalled_writepage(struct page *page,
>  	loff_t len;
> 
>  	J_ASSERT(PageLocked(page));
> -	J_ASSERT(page_has_buffers(page));
>  	if (page->index == size >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT)
>  		len = size & ~PAGE_CACHE_MASK;
>  	else
>  		len = PAGE_CACHE_SIZE;
> -	BUG_ON(walk_page_buffers(NULL, page_buffers(page), 0, len, NULL,
> -				 ext4_bh_unmapped_or_delay));
> +
> +	if (page_has_buffers(page)) {
> +		/* if page has buffers it should all be mapped
> +		 * and allocated. If there are not buffers attached
> +		 * to the page we know the page is dirty but it lost
> +		 * buffers. That means that at some moment in time
> +		 * after write_begin() / write_end() has been called
> +		 * all buffers have been clean and thus they must have been
> +		 * written at least once. So they are all mapped and we can
> +		 * happily proceed with mapping them and writing the page.
> +		 */
> +		BUG_ON(walk_page_buffers(NULL, page_buffers(page), 0, len, NULL,
> +					ext4_bh_unmapped_or_delay));
> +	}
> 
>  	if (ext4_journal_current_handle())
>  		goto no_write;
> @@ -2142,7 +2219,9 @@ static int ext4_journalled_writepage(struct page *page,
>  		 * really know unless we go poke around in the buffer_heads.
>  		 * But block_write_full_page will do the right thing.
>  		 */
> -		return block_write_full_page(page, ext4_get_block, wbc);
> +		return block_write_full_page(page,
> +						ext4_normal_get_block_write,
> +						wbc);
>  	}
>  no_write:
>  	redirty_page_for_writepage(wbc, page);

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists