Skip to content

K
Kernel

openeuler / Kernel
1 年多 前同步成功

通知 8
Star 0
Fork 0
K
Kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 06 9月, 2017 2 次提交
  3. 30 8月, 2017 4 次提交
  5. 22 8月, 2017 2 次提交
    • C
      f2fs: introduce discard_granularity sysfs entry · 969d1b18
      由 Chao Yu 提交于 
      Commit d618ebaf ("f2fs: enable small discard by default") enables
f2fs to issue 4K size discard in real-time discard mode. However, issuing
smaller discard may cost more lifetime but releasing less free space in
flash device. Since f2fs has ability of separating hot/cold data and
garbage collection, we can expect that small-sized invalid region would
expand soon with OPU, deletion or garbage collection on valid datas, so
it's better to delay or skip issuing smaller size discards, it could help
to reduce overmuch consumption of IO bandwidth and lifetime of flash
storage.

This patch makes f2fs selectng 64K size as its default minimal
granularity, and issue discard with the size which is not smaller than
minimal granularity. Also it exposes discard granularity as sysfs entry
for configuration in different scenario.

Jaegeuk Kim:
 We must issue all the accumulated discard commands when fstrim is called.
 So, I've added pend_list_tag[] to indicate whether we should issue the
 commands or not. If tag sets P_ACTIVE or P_TRIM, we have to issue them.
 P_TRIM is set once at a time, given fstrim trigger.
 In addition, issue_discard_thread is calling too much due to the number of
 discard commands remaining in the pending list. I added a timer to control
 it likewise gc_thread.
Signed-off-by: NChao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: NJaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
      969d1b18
    • C
      f2fs: retry to revoke atomic commit in -ENOMEM case · 7f2b4e8e
      由 Chao Yu 提交于 
      During atomic committing, if we encounter -ENOMEM in revoke path, it's
better to give a chance to retry revoking.
Signed-off-by: NChao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: NJaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
      7f2b4e8e
  7. 16 8月, 2017 1 次提交
  9. 10 8月, 2017 3 次提交
  11. 04 8月, 2017 1 次提交
  13. 01 8月, 2017 1 次提交
    • C
      f2fs: make background threads of f2fs being aware of freezing · dc6febb6
      由 Chao Yu 提交于 
      When ->freeze_fs is called from lvm for doing snapshot, it needs to
make sure there will be no more changes in filesystem's data, however,
previously, background threads like GC thread wasn't aware of freezing,
so in environment with active background threads, data of snapshot
becomes unstable.

This patch fixes this issue by adding sb_{start,end}_intwrite in
below background threads:
- GC thread
- flush thread
- discard thread

Note that, don't use sb_start_intwrite() in gc_thread_func() due to:

generic/241 reports below bug:

 ======================================================
 WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
 4.13.0-rc1+ #32 Tainted: G           O
 ------------------------------------------------------
 f2fs_gc-250:0/22186 is trying to acquire lock:
  (&sbi->gc_mutex){+.+...}, at: [<f8fa7f0b>] f2fs_sync_fs+0x7b/0x1b0 [f2fs]

 but task is already holding lock:
  (sb_internal#2){++++.-}, at: [<f8fb5609>] gc_thread_func+0x159/0x4a0 [f2fs]

 which lock already depends on the new lock.

 the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

 -> #2 (sb_internal#2){++++.-}:
        __lock_acquire+0x405/0x7b0
        lock_acquire+0xae/0x220
        __sb_start_write+0x11d/0x1f0
        f2fs_evict_inode+0x2d6/0x4e0 [f2fs]
        evict+0xa8/0x170
        iput+0x1fb/0x2c0
        f2fs_sync_inode_meta+0x3f/0xf0 [f2fs]
        write_checkpoint+0x1b1/0x750 [f2fs]
        f2fs_sync_fs+0x85/0x1b0 [f2fs]
        f2fs_do_sync_file.isra.24+0x137/0xa30 [f2fs]
        f2fs_sync_file+0x34/0x40 [f2fs]
        vfs_fsync_range+0x4a/0xa0
        do_fsync+0x3c/0x60
        SyS_fdatasync+0x15/0x20
        do_fast_syscall_32+0xa1/0x1b0
        entry_SYSENTER_32+0x4c/0x7b

 -> #1 (&sbi->cp_mutex){+.+...}:
        __lock_acquire+0x405/0x7b0
        lock_acquire+0xae/0x220
        __mutex_lock+0x4f/0x830
        mutex_lock_nested+0x25/0x30
        write_checkpoint+0x2f/0x750 [f2fs]
        f2fs_sync_fs+0x85/0x1b0 [f2fs]
        sync_filesystem+0x67/0x80
        generic_shutdown_super+0x27/0x100
        kill_block_super+0x22/0x50
        kill_f2fs_super+0x3a/0x40 [f2fs]
        deactivate_locked_super+0x3d/0x70
        deactivate_super+0x40/0x60
        cleanup_mnt+0x39/0x70
        __cleanup_mnt+0x10/0x20
        task_work_run+0x69/0x80
        exit_to_usermode_loop+0x57/0x92
        do_fast_syscall_32+0x18c/0x1b0
        entry_SYSENTER_32+0x4c/0x7b

 -> #0 (&sbi->gc_mutex){+.+...}:
        validate_chain.isra.36+0xc50/0xdb0
        __lock_acquire+0x405/0x7b0
        lock_acquire+0xae/0x220
        __mutex_lock+0x4f/0x830
        mutex_lock_nested+0x25/0x30
        f2fs_sync_fs+0x7b/0x1b0 [f2fs]
        f2fs_balance_fs_bg+0xb9/0x200 [f2fs]
        gc_thread_func+0x302/0x4a0 [f2fs]
        kthread+0xe9/0x120
        ret_from_fork+0x19/0x24

 other info that might help us debug this:

 Chain exists of:
   &sbi->gc_mutex --> &sbi->cp_mutex --> sb_internal#2

  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

        CPU0                    CPU1
        ----                    ----
   lock(sb_internal#2);
                                lock(&sbi->cp_mutex);
                                lock(sb_internal#2);
   lock(&sbi->gc_mutex);

  *** DEADLOCK ***

 1 lock held by f2fs_gc-250:0/22186:
  #0:  (sb_internal#2){++++.-}, at: [<f8fb5609>] gc_thread_func+0x159/0x4a0 [f2fs]

 stack backtrace:
 CPU: 2 PID: 22186 Comm: f2fs_gc-250:0 Tainted: G           O    4.13.0-rc1+ #32
 Hardware name: innotek GmbH VirtualBox/VirtualBox, BIOS VirtualBox 12/01/2006
 Call Trace:
  dump_stack+0x5f/0x92
  print_circular_bug+0x1b3/0x1bd
  validate_chain.isra.36+0xc50/0xdb0
  ? __this_cpu_preempt_check+0xf/0x20
  __lock_acquire+0x405/0x7b0
  lock_acquire+0xae/0x220
  ? f2fs_sync_fs+0x7b/0x1b0 [f2fs]
  __mutex_lock+0x4f/0x830
  ? f2fs_sync_fs+0x7b/0x1b0 [f2fs]
  mutex_lock_nested+0x25/0x30
  ? f2fs_sync_fs+0x7b/0x1b0 [f2fs]
  f2fs_sync_fs+0x7b/0x1b0 [f2fs]
  f2fs_balance_fs_bg+0xb9/0x200 [f2fs]
  gc_thread_func+0x302/0x4a0 [f2fs]
  ? preempt_schedule_common+0x2f/0x4d
  ? f2fs_gc+0x540/0x540 [f2fs]
  kthread+0xe9/0x120
  ? f2fs_gc+0x540/0x540 [f2fs]
  ? kthread_create_on_node+0x30/0x30
  ret_from_fork+0x19/0x24

The deadlock occurs in below condition:
GC Thread			Thread B
- sb_start_intwrite
				- f2fs_sync_file
				 - f2fs_sync_fs
				  - mutex_lock(&sbi->gc_mutex)
				   - write_checkpoint
				    - block_operations
				     - f2fs_sync_inode_meta
				      - iput
				       - sb_start_intwrite
 - mutex_lock(&sbi->gc_mutex)

Fix this by altering sb_start_intwrite to sb_start_write_trylock.
Signed-off-by: NChao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: NJaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
      dc6febb6
  15. 29 7月, 2017 1 次提交
  17. 08 7月, 2017 3 次提交
  19. 04 7月, 2017 5 次提交
  21. 09 6月, 2017 1 次提交
  23. 24 5月, 2017 11 次提交
  25. 09 5月, 2017 2 次提交
  27. 04 5月, 2017 3 次提交