1. 07 1月, 2022 3 次提交
    • N
      btrfs: make device add compatible with paused balance in btrfs_exclop_start_try_lock · 621a1ee1
      Nikolay Borisov 提交于
      This is needed to enable device add to work in cases when a file system
      has been mounted with 'skip_balance' mount option.
      Signed-off-by: NNikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
      Reviewed-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
      621a1ee1
    • N
      btrfs: introduce exclusive operation BALANCE_PAUSED state · efc0e69c
      Nikolay Borisov 提交于
      Current set of exclusive operation states is not sufficient to handle
      all practical use cases. In particular there is a need to be able to add
      a device to a filesystem that have paused balance. Currently there is no
      way to distinguish between a running and a paused balance. Fix this by
      introducing BTRFS_EXCLOP_BALANCE_PAUSED which is going to be set in 2
      occasions:
      
      1. When a filesystem is mounted with skip_balance and there is an
         unfinished balance it will now be into BALANCE_PAUSED instead of
         simply BALANCE state.
      
      2. When a running balance is paused.
      Signed-off-by: NNikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
      Reviewed-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
      efc0e69c
    • F
      btrfs: make send work with concurrent block group relocation · d96b3424
      Filipe Manana 提交于
      We don't allow send and balance/relocation to run in parallel in order
      to prevent send failing or silently producing some bad stream. This is
      because while send is using an extent (specially metadata) or about to
      read a metadata extent and expecting it belongs to a specific parent
      node, relocation can run, the transaction used for the relocation is
      committed and the extent gets reallocated while send is still using the
      extent, so it ends up with a different content than expected. This can
      result in just failing to read a metadata extent due to failure of the
      validation checks (parent transid, level, etc), failure to find a
      backreference for a data extent, and other unexpected failures. Besides
      reallocation, there's also a similar problem of an extent getting
      discarded when it's unpinned after the transaction used for block group
      relocation is committed.
      
      The restriction between balance and send was added in commit 9e967495
      ("Btrfs: prevent send failures and crashes due to concurrent relocation"),
      kernel 5.3, while the more general restriction between send and relocation
      was added in commit 1cea5cf0 ("btrfs: ensure relocation never runs
      while we have send operations running"), kernel 5.14.
      
      Both send and relocation can be very long running operations. Relocation
      because it has to do a lot of IO and expensive backreference lookups in
      case there are many snapshots, and send due to read IO when operating on
      very large trees. This makes it inconvenient for users and tools to deal
      with scheduling both operations.
      
      For zoned filesystem we also have automatic block group relocation, so
      send can fail with -EAGAIN when users least expect it or send can end up
      delaying the block group relocation for too long. In the future we might
      also get the automatic block group relocation for non zoned filesystems.
      
      This change makes it possible for send and relocation to run in parallel.
      This is achieved the following way:
      
      1) For all tree searches, send acquires a read lock on the commit root
         semaphore;
      
      2) After each tree search, and before releasing the commit root semaphore,
         the leaf is cloned and placed in the search path (struct btrfs_path);
      
      3) After releasing the commit root semaphore, the changed_cb() callback
         is invoked, which operates on the leaf and writes commands to the pipe
         (or file in case send/receive is not used with a pipe). It's important
         here to not hold a lock on the commit root semaphore, because if we did
         we could deadlock when sending and receiving to the same filesystem
         using a pipe - the send task blocks on the pipe because it's full, the
         receive task, which is the only consumer of the pipe, triggers a
         transaction commit when attempting to create a subvolume or reserve
         space for a write operation for example, but the transaction commit
         blocks trying to write lock the commit root semaphore, resulting in a
         deadlock;
      
      4) Before moving to the next key, or advancing to the next change in case
         of an incremental send, check if a transaction used for relocation was
         committed (or is about to finish its commit). If so, release the search
         path(s) and restart the search, to where we were before, so that we
         don't operate on stale extent buffers. The search restarts are always
         possible because both the send and parent roots are RO, and no one can
         add, remove of update keys (change their offset) in RO trees - the
         only exception is deduplication, but that is still not allowed to run
         in parallel with send;
      
      5) Periodically check if there is contention on the commit root semaphore,
         which means there is a transaction commit trying to write lock it, and
         release the semaphore and reschedule if there is contention, so as to
         avoid causing any significant delays to transaction commits.
      
      This leaves some room for optimizations for send to have less path
      releases and re searching the trees when there's relocation running, but
      for now it's kept simple as it performs quite well (on very large trees
      with resulting send streams in the order of a few hundred gigabytes).
      
      Test case btrfs/187, from fstests, stresses relocation, send and
      deduplication attempting to run in parallel, but without verifying if send
      succeeds and if it produces correct streams. A new test case will be added
      that exercises relocation happening in parallel with send and then checks
      that send succeeds and the resulting streams are correct.
      
      A final note is that for now this still leaves the mutual exclusion
      between send operations and deduplication on files belonging to a root
      used by send operations. A solution for that will be slightly more complex
      but it will eventually be built on top of this change.
      Signed-off-by: NFilipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
      d96b3424
  2. 03 1月, 2022 37 次提交