Skip to content

K
kernel_linux

OpenHarmony / kernel_linux
上一次同步 4 年多

通知 15
Star 8
Fork 2
K
kernel_linux
切换分支/标签
  1. 30 1月, 2008 1 次提交
    • N
      spinlock: lockbreak cleanup · 95c354fe
      由 Nick Piggin 提交于 
      The break_lock data structure and code for spinlocks is quite nasty.
Not only does it double the size of a spinlock but it changes locking to
a potentially less optimal trylock.

Put all of that under CONFIG_GENERIC_LOCKBREAK, and introduce a
__raw_spin_is_contended that uses the lock data itself to determine whether
there are waiters on the lock, to be used if CONFIG_GENERIC_LOCKBREAK is
not set.

Rename need_lockbreak to spin_needbreak, make it use spin_is_contended to
decouple it from the spinlock implementation, and make it typesafe (rwlocks
do not have any need_lockbreak sites -- why do they even get bloated up
with that break_lock then?).
Signed-off-by: NNick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
      95c354fe
  3. 29 1月, 2008 3 次提交
    • G
      ext4: Add the journal checksum feature · 818d276c
      由 Girish Shilamkar 提交于 
      The journal checksum feature adds two new flags i.e
JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_ASYNC_COMMIT and JBD2_FEATURE_COMPAT_CHECKSUM.

JBD2_FEATURE_CHECKSUM flag indicates that the commit block contains the
checksum for the blocks described by the descriptor blocks.
Due to checksums, writing of the commit record no longer needs to be
synchronous. Now commit record can be sent to disk without waiting for
descriptor blocks to be written to disk. This behavior is controlled
using JBD2_FEATURE_ASYNC_COMMIT flag. Older kernels/e2fsck should not be
able to recover the journal with _ASYNC_COMMIT hence it is made
incompat.
The commit header has been extended to hold the checksum along with the
type of the checksum.

For recovery in pass scan checksums are verified to ensure the sanity
and completeness(in case of _ASYNC_COMMIT) of every transaction.
Signed-off-by: NAndreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>
Signed-off-by: NGirish Shilamkar <girish@clusterfs.com>
Signed-off-by: NDave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: NMingming Cao <cmm@us.ibm.com>
      818d276c
    • J
      jbd2: jbd2 stats through procfs · 8e85fb3f
      由 Johann Lombardi 提交于 
      The patch below updates the jbd stats patch to 2.6.20/jbd2.
The initial patch was posted by Alex Tomas in December 2005
(http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=113538565128617&w=2).
It provides statistics via procfs such as transaction lifetime and size.

Sometimes, investigating performance problems, i find useful to have
stats from jbd about transaction's lifetime, size, etc. here is a
patch for review and inclusion probably.

for example, stats after creation of 3M files in htree directory:

[root@bob ~]# cat /proc/fs/jbd/sda/history
R/C  tid   wait  run   lock  flush log   hndls  block inlog ctime write drop  close
R    261   8260  2720  0     0     750   9892   8170  8187
C    259                                                    750   0     4885  1
R    262   20    2200  10    0     770   9836   8170  8187
R    263   30    2200  10    0     3070  9812   8170  8187
R    264   0     5000  10    0     1340  0      0     0
C    261                                                    8240  3212  4957  0
R    265   8260  1470  0     0     4640  9854   8170  8187
R    266   0     5000  10    0     1460  0      0     0
C    262                                                    8210  2989  4868  0
R    267   8230  1490  10    0     4440  9875   8171  8188
R    268   0     5000  10    0     1260  0      0     0
C    263                                                    7710  2937  4908  0
R    269   7730  1470  10    0     3330  9841   8170  8187
R    270   0     5000  10    0     830   0      0     0
C    265                                                    8140  3234  4898  0
C    267                                                    720   0     4849  1
R    271   8630  2740  20    0     740   9819   8170  8187
C    269                                                    800   0     4214  1
R    272   40    2170  10    0     830   9716   8170  8187
R    273   40    2280  0     0     3530  9799   8170  8187
R    274   0     5000  10    0     990   0      0     0


where,

R     - line for transaction's life from T_RUNNING to T_FINISHED
C     - line for transaction's checkpointing
tid   - transaction's id
wait  - for how long we were waiting for new transaction to start
         (the longest period journal_start() took in this transaction)
run   - real transaction's lifetime (from T_RUNNING to T_LOCKED
lock  - how long we were waiting for all handles to close
         (time the transaction was in T_LOCKED)
flush - how long it took to flush all data (data=ordered)
log   - how long it took to write the transaction to the log
hndls - how many handles got to the transaction
block - how many blocks got to the transaction
inlog - how many blocks are written to the log (block + descriptors)
ctime - how long it took to checkpoint the transaction
write - how many blocks have been written during checkpointing
drop  - how many blocks have been dropped during checkpointing
close - how many running transactions have been closed to checkpoint this one

all times are in msec.


[root@bob ~]# cat /proc/fs/jbd/sda/info
280 transaction, each upto 8192 blocks
average:
  1633ms waiting for transaction
  3616ms running transaction
  5ms transaction was being locked
  1ms flushing data (in ordered mode)
  1799ms logging transaction
  11781 handles per transaction
  5629 blocks per transaction
  5641 logged blocks per transaction
Signed-off-by: NJohann Lombardi <johann.lombardi@bull.net>
Signed-off-by: NMariusz Kozlowski <m.kozlowski@tuxland.pl>
Signed-off-by: NMingming Cao <cmm@us.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: NEric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
      8e85fb3f
    • J
      jbd2: Fix assertion failure in fs/jbd2/checkpoint.c · f5a7a6b0
      由 Jan Kara 提交于 
      Before we start committing a transaction, we call
__journal_clean_checkpoint_list() to cleanup transaction's written-back
buffers.

If this call happens to remove all of them (and there were already some
buffers), __journal_remove_checkpoint() will decide to free the transaction
because it isn't (yet) a committing transaction and soon we fail some
assertion - the transaction really isn't ready to be freed :).

We change the check in __journal_remove_checkpoint() to free only a
transaction in T_FINISHED state.  The locking there is subtle though (as
everywhere in JBD ;().  We use j_list_lock to protect the check and a
subsequent call to __journal_drop_transaction() and do the same in the end
of journal_commit_transaction() which is the only place where a transaction
can get to T_FINISHED state.

Probably I'm too paranoid here and such locking is not really necessary -
checkpoint lists are processed only from log_do_checkpoint() where a
transaction must be already committed to be processed or from
__journal_clean_checkpoint_list() where kjournald itself calls it and thus
transaction cannot change state either.  Better be safe if something
changes in future...
Signed-off-by: NJan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
      f5a7a6b0
  5. 18 10月, 2007 3 次提交
  7. 17 7月, 2007 1 次提交
  9. 09 5月, 2007 1 次提交
  11. 08 12月, 2006 1 次提交
  13. 12 10月, 2006 5 次提交
  15. 04 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  17. 26 9月, 2006 1 次提交
    • J
      [PATCH] jbd: fix commit of ordered data buffers · 3998b930
      由 Jan Kara 提交于 
      Original commit code assumes, that when a buffer on BJ_SyncData list is
locked, it is being written to disk.  But this is not true and hence it can
lead to a potential data loss on crash.  Also the code didn't count with
the fact that journal_dirty_data() can steal buffers from committing
transaction and hence could write buffers that no longer belong to the
committing transaction.  Finally it could possibly happen that we tried
writing out one buffer several times.

The patch below tries to solve these problems by a complete rewrite of the
data commit code.  We go through buffers on t_sync_datalist, lock buffers
needing write out and store them in an array.  Buffers are also immediately
refiled to BJ_Locked list or unfiled (if the write out is completed).  When
the array is full or we have to block on buffer lock, we submit all
accumulated buffers for IO.

[suitable for 2.6.18.x around the 2.6.19-rc2 timeframe]
Signed-off-by: NJan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
      3998b930
  19. 28 8月, 2006 1 次提交
  21. 23 6月, 2006 1 次提交
    • J
      [PATCH] jbd: fix BUG in journal_commit_transaction() · 9ada7340
      由 Jan Kara 提交于 
      Fix possible assertion failure in journal_commit_transaction() on
jh->b_next_transaction == NULL (when we are processing BJ_Forget list and
buffer is not jbddirty).

!jbddirty buffers can be placed on BJ_Forget list for example by
journal_forget() or by __dispose_buffer() - generally such buffer means
that it has been freed by this transaction.

Freed buffers should not be reallocated until the transaction has committed
(that's why we have the assertion there) but they *can* be reallocated when
the transaction has already been committed to disk and we are just
processing the BJ_Forget list (as soon as we remove b_committed_data from
the bitmap bh, ext3 will be able to reallocate buffers freed by the
committing transaction).  So we have to also count with the case that the
buffer has been reallocated and b_next_transaction has been already set.

And one more subtle point: it can happen that we manage to reallocate the
buffer and also mark it jbddirty.  Then we also add the freed buffer to the
checkpoint list of the committing trasaction.  But that should do no harm.

Non-jbddirty buffers should be filed to BJ_Reserved and not BJ_Metadata
list.  It can actually happen that we refile such buffers during the commit
phase when we reallocate in the running transaction blocks deleted in
committing transaction (and that can happen if the committing transaction
already wrote all the data and is just cleaning up BJ_Forget list).
Signed-off-by: NJan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Acked-by: N"Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
      9ada7340
  23. 15 2月, 2006 1 次提交
  25. 19 1月, 2006 1 次提交
  27. 07 11月, 2005 1 次提交
  29. 08 9月, 2005 2 次提交
  31. 17 4月, 2005 1 次提交
    • L
      Linux-2.6.12-rc2 · 1da177e4
      由 Linus Torvalds 提交于 
      Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.

Let it rip!
      1da177e4