linux/include/linux/writeback.h

154 lines
4.6 KiB

[PATCH] writeback: fix range handling When a writeback_control's `start' and `end' fields are used to indicate a one-byte-range starting at file offset zero, the required values of .start=0,.end=0 mean that the ->writepages() implementation has no way of telling that it is being asked to perform a range request. Because we're currently overloading (start == 0 && end == 0) to mean "this is not a write-a-range request". To make all this sane, the patch changes range of writeback_control. So caller does: If it is calling ->writepages() to write pages, it sets range (range_start/end or range_cyclic) always. And if range_cyclic is true, ->writepages() thinks the range is cyclic, otherwise it just uses range_start and range_end. This patch does, - Add LLONG_MAX, LLONG_MIN, ULLONG_MAX to include/linux/kernel.h -1 is usually ok for range_end (type is long long). But, if someone did, range_end += val; range_end is "val - 1" u64val = range_end >> bits; u64val is "~(0ULL)" or something, they are wrong. So, this adds LLONG_MAX to avoid nasty things, and uses LLONG_MAX for range_end. - All callers of ->writepages() sets range_start/end or range_cyclic. - Fix updates of ->writeback_index. It seems already bit strange. If it starts at 0 and ended by check of nr_to_write, this last index may reduce chance to scan end of file. So, this updates ->writeback_index only if range_cyclic is true or whole-file is scanned. Signed-off-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp> Cc: Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com> Cc: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cantab.net> Cc: Steven French <sfrench@us.ibm.com> Cc: "Vladimir V. Saveliev" <vs@namesys.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-06-23 02:03:26 -07:00
[PATCH] writeback: fix range handling When a writeback_control's `start' and `end' fields are used to indicate a one-byte-range starting at file offset zero, the required values of .start=0,.end=0 mean that the ->writepages() implementation has no way of telling that it is being asked to perform a range request. Because we're currently overloading (start == 0 && end == 0) to mean "this is not a write-a-range request". To make all this sane, the patch changes range of writeback_control. So caller does: If it is calling ->writepages() to write pages, it sets range (range_start/end or range_cyclic) always. And if range_cyclic is true, ->writepages() thinks the range is cyclic, otherwise it just uses range_start and range_end. This patch does, - Add LLONG_MAX, LLONG_MIN, ULLONG_MAX to include/linux/kernel.h -1 is usually ok for range_end (type is long long). But, if someone did, range_end += val; range_end is "val - 1" u64val = range_end >> bits; u64val is "~(0ULL)" or something, they are wrong. So, this adds LLONG_MAX to avoid nasty things, and uses LLONG_MAX for range_end. - All callers of ->writepages() sets range_start/end or range_cyclic. - Fix updates of ->writeback_index. It seems already bit strange. If it starts at 0 and ended by check of nr_to_write, this last index may reduce chance to scan end of file. So, this updates ->writeback_index only if range_cyclic is true or whole-file is scanned. Signed-off-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp> Cc: Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com> Cc: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cantab.net> Cc: Steven French <sfrench@us.ibm.com> Cc: "Vladimir V. Saveliev" <vs@namesys.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-06-23 02:03:26 -07:00
writeback: speed up writeback of big dirty files After making dirty a 100M file, the normal behavior is to start the writeback for all data after 30s delays. But sometimes the following happens instead: - after 30s: ~4M - after 5s: ~4M - after 5s: all remaining 92M Some analyze shows that the internal io dispatch queues goes like this: s_io s_more_io ------------------------- 1) 100M,1K 0 2) 1K 96M 3) 0 96M 1) initial state with a 100M file and a 1K file 2) 4M written, nr_to_write <= 0, so write more 3) 1K written, nr_to_write > 0, no more writes(BUG) nr_to_write > 0 in (3) fools the upper layer to think that data have all been written out. The big dirty file is actually still sitting in s_more_io. We cannot simply splice s_more_io back to s_io as soon as s_io becomes empty, and let the loop in generic_sync_sb_inodes() continue: this may starve newly expired inodes in s_dirty. It is also not an option to draw inodes from both s_more_io and s_dirty, an let the loop go on: this might lead to live locks, and might also starve other superblocks in sync time(well kupdate may still starve some superblocks, that's another bug). We have to return when a full scan of s_io completes. So nr_to_write > 0 does not necessarily mean that "all data are written". This patch introduces a flag writeback_control.more_io to indicate that more io should be done. With it the big dirty file no longer has to wait for the next kupdate invokation 5s later. In sync_sb_inodes() we only set more_io on super_blocks we actually visited. This avoids the interaction between two pdflush deamons. Also in __sync_single_inode() we don't blindly keep requeuing the io if the filesystem cannot progress. Failing to do so may lead to 100% iowait. Tested-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn> Cc: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-02-04 22:29:36 -08:00
mm: per device dirty threshold Scale writeback cache per backing device, proportional to its writeout speed. By decoupling the BDI dirty thresholds a number of problems we currently have will go away, namely: - mutual interference starvation (for any number of BDIs); - deadlocks with stacked BDIs (loop, FUSE and local NFS mounts). It might be that all dirty pages are for a single BDI while other BDIs are idling. By giving each BDI a 'fair' share of the dirty limit, each one can have dirty pages outstanding and make progress. A global threshold also creates a deadlock for stacked BDIs; when A writes to B, and A generates enough dirty pages to get throttled, B will never start writeback until the dirty pages go away. Again, by giving each BDI its own 'independent' dirty limit, this problem is avoided. So the problem is to determine how to distribute the total dirty limit across the BDIs fairly and efficiently. A DBI that has a large dirty limit but does not have any dirty pages outstanding is a waste. What is done is to keep a floating proportion between the DBIs based on writeback completions. This way faster/more active devices get a larger share than slower/idle devices. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix warnings] [hugh@veritas.com: Fix occasional hang when a task couldn't get out of balance_dirty_pages] Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-10-16 23:25:50 -07:00