Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: don't do async reclaim during log replay V2
On 10/23/2014 04:44 AM, Miao Xie wrote: On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 11:27:17 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: Trying to reproduce a log enospc bug I hit a panic in the async reclaim code during log replay. This is because we use fs_info-fs_root as our root for shrinking and such. Technically we can use whatever root we want, but let's just not allow async reclaim while we're doing log replay. Thanks, Why not move the code of fs_root initialization to the front of log replay? I think it is better than the fix way in this patch because the async reclaimer can help us do some work. Because this is simpler. We could move the initialization forward, but then say somebody comes and adds some other dependency to the async reclaim stuff in the future and doesn't think about log replay and suddenly some poor sap's box panics on mount. Log replay is a known quantity, we don't have to worry about enospc, so lets make it as simple as possible. Thanks, Josef -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: don't do async reclaim during log replay V2
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 09:39:19 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: On 10/23/2014 04:44 AM, Miao Xie wrote: On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 11:27:17 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: Trying to reproduce a log enospc bug I hit a panic in the async reclaim code during log replay. This is because we use fs_info-fs_root as our root for shrinking and such. Technically we can use whatever root we want, but let's just not allow async reclaim while we're doing log replay. Thanks, Why not move the code of fs_root initialization to the front of log replay? I think it is better than the fix way in this patch because the async reclaimer can help us do some work. Because this is simpler. We could move the initialization forward, but then say somebody comes and adds some other dependency to the async reclaim stuff in the future and doesn't think about log replay and suddenly some poor sap's box panics on mount. Log replay is a known quantity, we don't have to worry about enospc, so lets make it as simple as possible. Thanks, Yes, you are right. So this patch looks good. Reviewed-by: Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: don't do async reclaim during log replay V2
Ping..
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:44:54 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 11:27:17 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
Trying to reproduce a log enospc bug I hit a panic in the async reclaim code
during log replay. This is because we use fs_info-fs_root as our root for
shrinking and such. Technically we can use whatever root we want, but let's
just not allow async reclaim while we're doing log replay. Thanks,
Why not move the code of fs_root initialization to the front of log replay?
I think it is better than the fix way in this patch because the async
reclaimer
can help us do some work.
Thanks
Miao
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fb.com
---
V1-V2: use fs_info-log_root_recovering instead, didn't notice this existed
before.
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 8 +++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index 28a27d5..44d0497 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
@@ -4513,7 +4513,13 @@ again:
space_info-flush = 1;
} else if (!ret space_info-flags BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA) {
used += orig_bytes;
-if (need_do_async_reclaim(space_info, root-fs_info, used)
+/*
+ * We will do the space reservation dance during log replay,
+ * which means we won't have fs_info-fs_root set, so don't do
+ * the async reclaim as we will panic.
+ */
+if (!root-fs_info-log_root_recovering
+need_do_async_reclaim(space_info, root-fs_info, used)
!work_busy(root-fs_info-async_reclaim_work))
queue_work(system_unbound_wq,
root-fs_info-async_reclaim_work);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: don't do async reclaim during log replay V2
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 11:27:17 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
Trying to reproduce a log enospc bug I hit a panic in the async reclaim code
during log replay. This is because we use fs_info-fs_root as our root for
shrinking and such. Technically we can use whatever root we want, but let's
just not allow async reclaim while we're doing log replay. Thanks,
Why not move the code of fs_root initialization to the front of log replay?
I think it is better than the fix way in this patch because the async reclaimer
can help us do some work.
Thanks
Miao
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fb.com
---
V1-V2: use fs_info-log_root_recovering instead, didn't notice this existed
before.
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 8 +++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index 28a27d5..44d0497 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
@@ -4513,7 +4513,13 @@ again:
space_info-flush = 1;
} else if (!ret space_info-flags BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA) {
used += orig_bytes;
- if (need_do_async_reclaim(space_info, root-fs_info, used)
+ /*
+ * We will do the space reservation dance during log replay,
+ * which means we won't have fs_info-fs_root set, so don't do
+ * the async reclaim as we will panic.
+ */
+ if (!root-fs_info-log_root_recovering
+ need_do_async_reclaim(space_info, root-fs_info, used)
!work_busy(root-fs_info-async_reclaim_work))
queue_work(system_unbound_wq,
root-fs_info-async_reclaim_work);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[PATCH] Btrfs: don't do async reclaim during log replay V2
Trying to reproduce a log enospc bug I hit a panic in the async reclaim code
during log replay. This is because we use fs_info-fs_root as our root for
shrinking and such. Technically we can use whatever root we want, but let's
just not allow async reclaim while we're doing log replay. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fb.com
---
V1-V2: use fs_info-log_root_recovering instead, didn't notice this existed
before.
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 8 +++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index 28a27d5..44d0497 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
@@ -4513,7 +4513,13 @@ again:
space_info-flush = 1;
} else if (!ret space_info-flags BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA) {
used += orig_bytes;
- if (need_do_async_reclaim(space_info, root-fs_info, used)
+ /*
+* We will do the space reservation dance during log replay,
+* which means we won't have fs_info-fs_root set, so don't do
+* the async reclaim as we will panic.
+*/
+ if (!root-fs_info-log_root_recovering
+ need_do_async_reclaim(space_info, root-fs_info, used)
!work_busy(root-fs_info-async_reclaim_work))
queue_work(system_unbound_wq,
root-fs_info-async_reclaim_work);
--
1.8.3.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
