[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220412062959.581114826@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 08:31:44 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Filipe Manana <fdmanana@...e.com>,
Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>
Subject: [PATCH 5.17 286/343] btrfs: avoid defragging extents whose next extents are not targets
From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>
commit 75a36a7d3ea904cef2e5b56af0c58cc60dcf947a upstream.
[BUG]
There is a report that autodefrag is defragging single sector, which
is completely waste of IO, and no help for defragging:
btrfs-cleaner-808 defrag_one_locked_range: root=256 ino=651122 start=0 len=4096
[CAUSE]
In defrag_collect_targets(), we check if the current range (A) can be merged
with next one (B).
If mergeable, we will add range A into target for defrag.
However there is a catch for autodefrag, when checking mergeability
against range B, we intentionally pass 0 as @newer_than, hoping to get a
higher chance to merge with the next extent.
But in the next iteration, range B will looked up by defrag_lookup_extent(),
with non-zero @newer_than.
And if range B is not really newer, it will rejected directly, causing
only range A being defragged, while we expect to defrag both range A and
B.
[FIX]
Since the root cause is the difference in check condition of
defrag_check_next_extent() and defrag_collect_targets(), we fix it by:
1. Pass @newer_than to defrag_check_next_extent()
2. Pass @extent_thresh to defrag_check_next_extent()
This makes the check between defrag_collect_targets() and
defrag_check_next_extent() more consistent.
While there is still some minor difference, the remaining checks are
focus on runtime flags like writeback/delalloc, which are mostly
transient and safe to be checked only in defrag_collect_targets().
Link: https://github.com/btrfs/linux/issues/423#issuecomment-1066981856
CC: stable@...r.kernel.org # 5.16+
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@...e.com>
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
@@ -1215,7 +1215,7 @@ static u32 get_extent_max_capacity(const
}
static bool defrag_check_next_extent(struct inode *inode, struct extent_map *em,
- bool locked)
+ u32 extent_thresh, u64 newer_than, bool locked)
{
struct extent_map *next;
bool ret = false;
@@ -1225,11 +1225,12 @@ static bool defrag_check_next_extent(str
return false;
/*
- * We want to check if the next extent can be merged with the current
- * one, which can be an extent created in a past generation, so we pass
- * a minimum generation of 0 to defrag_lookup_extent().
+ * Here we need to pass @newer_then when checking the next extent, or
+ * we will hit a case we mark current extent for defrag, but the next
+ * one will not be a target.
+ * This will just cause extra IO without really reducing the fragments.
*/
- next = defrag_lookup_extent(inode, em->start + em->len, 0, locked);
+ next = defrag_lookup_extent(inode, em->start + em->len, newer_than, locked);
/* No more em or hole */
if (!next || next->block_start >= EXTENT_MAP_LAST_BYTE)
goto out;
@@ -1241,6 +1242,13 @@ static bool defrag_check_next_extent(str
*/
if (next->len >= get_extent_max_capacity(em))
goto out;
+ /* Skip older extent */
+ if (next->generation < newer_than)
+ goto out;
+ /* Also check extent size */
+ if (next->len >= extent_thresh)
+ goto out;
+
ret = true;
out:
free_extent_map(next);
@@ -1446,7 +1454,7 @@ static int defrag_collect_targets(struct
goto next;
next_mergeable = defrag_check_next_extent(&inode->vfs_inode, em,
- locked);
+ extent_thresh, newer_than, locked);
if (!next_mergeable) {
struct defrag_target_range *last;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists