[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100422191309.GC19286@quack.suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:13:09 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/4] writeback: limit write_cache_pages integrity
scanning to current EOF
On Tue 20-04-10 13:40:05, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> sync can currently take a really long time if a concurrent writer is
> extending a file. The problem is that the dirty pages on the address
> space grow in the same direction as write_cache_pages scans, so if
> the writer keeps ahead of writeback, the writeback will not
> terminate until the writer stops adding dirty pages.
>
> For a data integrity sync, we only need to write the pages dirty at
> the time we start the writeback, so we can stop scanning once we get
> to the page that was at the end of the file at the time the scan
> started.
>
> This will prevent operations like copying a large file preventing
> sync from completing as it will not write back pages that were
> dirtied after the sync was started. This does not impact the
> existing integrity guarantees, as any dirty page (old or new)
> within the EOF range at the start of the scan will still be
> captured.
Looks good.
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
> ---
> mm/page-writeback.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> index e22af84..4ba2728 100644
> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> @@ -852,7 +852,22 @@ int write_cache_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
> if (wbc->range_start == 0 && wbc->range_end == LLONG_MAX)
> range_whole = 1;
> cycled = 1; /* ignore range_cyclic tests */
> +
> + /*
> + * If this is a data integrity sync, cap the writeback to the
> + * current end of file. Any extension to the file that occurs
> + * after this is a new write and we don't need to write those
> + * pages out to fulfil our data integrity requirements. If we
> + * try to write them out, we can get stuck in this scan until
> + * the concurrent writer stops adding dirty pages and extending
> + * EOF.
> + */
> + if (wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_ALL &&
> + wbc->range_end == LLONG_MAX) {
> + end = i_size_read(mapping->host) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
> + }
> }
> +
> retry:
> done_index = index;
> while (!done && (index <= end)) {
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists