On 2018/2/9 20:56, Yunlong Song wrote:
> As what I point in last mail, if the atomic file is not committed
> yet, gc_data_segment will register_inmem_page the GCed data pages.
We will skip GCing that page as below check:
- move_data_{page,block}
- f2fs_is_atomic_file()
skip out;
No?
Thanks,
> This will cause these data pages written twice, the first write
> happens in move_data_page->do_write_data_page, and the second
> write happens in later __commit_inmem_pages->do_write_data_page.
>
> On 2018/2/9 20:44, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2018/2/8 11:11, Yunlong Song wrote:
>>> Then the GCed data pages are totally mixed with the inmem atomic pages,
>>
>> If we add dio_rwsem, GC flow is exclude with atomic write flow. There
>> will be not race case to mix GCed page into atomic pages.
>>
>> Or you mean:
>>
>> - gc_data_segment
>> - move_data_page
>> - f2fs_is_atomic_file
>> - f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write
>> - set_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_FILE);
>> - f2fs_set_data_page_dirty
>> - register_inmem_page
>>
>> In this case, GCed page can be mixed into database transaction, but could
>> it cause any problem except break rule of isolation for transaction.
>>
>>> this will cause the atomic commit ops write the GCed data pages twice
>>> (the first write happens in GC).
>>>
>>> How about using the early two patches to separate the inmem data pages
>>> and GCed data pages, and use dio_rwsem instead of this patch to fix the
>>> dnode page problem (dnode page commited but data page are not committed
>>> for the GCed page)?
>>
>> Could we fix the race case first, based on that fixing, and then find the
>> place that we can improve?
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2018/2/7 20:16, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>> On 2018/2/6 11:49, Yunlong Song wrote:
>>>>> This patch adds fi->commit_lock to avoid the case that GCed node pages
>>>>> are committed but GCed data pages are not committed. This can avoid the
>>>>> db file run into inconsistent state when sudden-power-off happens if
>>>>> data pages of atomic file is allowed to be GCed before.
>>>>
>>>> do_fsync: GC:
>>>> - mutex_lock(&fi->commit_lock);
>>>> - lock_page()
>>>> - mutex_lock(&fi->commit_lock);
>>>> - lock_page()
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, please consider lock dependency & code complexity, IMO, reuse
>>>> fi->dio_rwsem[WRITE] will be enough as below:
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> fs/f2fs/file.c | 3 +++
>>>> fs/f2fs/gc.c | 5 -----
>>>> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/file.c b/fs/f2fs/file.c
>>>> index 672a542e5464..1bdc11feb8d0 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/file.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/file.c
>>>> @@ -1711,6 +1711,8 @@ static int f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write(struct file
>>>> *filp)
>>>>
>>>> inode_lock(inode);
>>>>
>>>> + down_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->dio_rwsem[WRITE]);
>>>> +
>>>> if (f2fs_is_volatile_file(inode))
>>>> goto err_out;
>>>>
>>>> @@ -1729,6 +1731,7 @@ static int f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write(struct file
>>>> *filp)
>>>> ret = f2fs_do_sync_file(filp, 0, LLONG_MAX, 1, false);
>>>> }
>>>> err_out:
>>>> + up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->dio_rwsem[WRITE]);
>>>> inode_unlock(inode);
>>>> mnt_drop_write_file(filp);
>>>> return ret;
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>> index b9d93fd532a9..e49416283563 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>> @@ -622,9 +622,6 @@ static void move_data_block(struct inode *inode,
>>>> block_t bidx,
>>>> if (!check_valid_map(F2FS_I_SB(inode), segno, off))
>>>> goto out;
>>>>
>>>> - if (f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode))
>>>> - goto out;
>>
>> Seems that we need this check.
>>
>>>> -
>>>> if (f2fs_is_pinned_file(inode)) {
>>>> f2fs_pin_file_control(inode, true);
>>>> goto out;
>>>> @@ -729,8 +726,6 @@ static void move_data_page(struct inode *inode,
>>>> block_t bidx, int gc_type,
>>>> if (!check_valid_map(F2FS_I_SB(inode), segno, off))
>>>> goto out;
>>>>
>>>> - if (f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode))
>>>> - goto out;
>>
>> Ditto.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>> if (f2fs_is_pinned_file(inode)) {
>>>> if (gc_type == FG_GC)
>>>> f2fs_pin_file_control(inode, true);
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> .
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
