2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2006-10-03 23:01:26 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: positively dispose the unmapped data buffers in journal_commit_transaction()
After ext3-ordered files are truncated, there is a possibility that the
pages which cannot be estimated still remain. Remaining pages can be
released when the system has really few memory. So, it is not memory
leakage. But the resource management software etc. may not work
correctly.
It is possible that journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release the buffers, and
the pages to which they belong because they are attached to a commiting
transaction and journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release them. To release
such the buffers and the pages later, journal_unmap_buffer() leaves it to
journal_commit_transaction(). (journal_unmap_buffer() puts the mark
'BH_Freed' to the buffers so that journal_commit_transaction() can
identify whether they can be released or not.)
In the journalled mode and the writeback mode, jbd does with only metadata
buffers. But in the ordered mode, jbd does with metadata buffers and also
data buffers.
Actually, journal_commit_transaction() releases only the metadata buffers
of which release is demanded by journal_unmap_buffer(), and also releases
the pages to which they belong if possible.
As a result, the data buffers of which release is demanded by
journal_unmap_buffer() remain after a transaction commits. And also the
pages to which they belong remain.
Such the remained pages don't have mapping any longer. Due to this fact,
there is a possibility that the pages which cannot be estimated remain.
The metadata buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which
they belong can be released at 'JBD: commit phase 7'.
Therefore, by applying the same code into 'JBD: commit phase 2' (where the
data buffers are done with), journal_commit_transaction() can also release
the data buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which they belong.
As a result, all the buffers marked 'BH_Freed' can be released, and also
all the pages to which these buffers belong can be released at
journal_commit_transaction(). So, the page which cannot be estimated is
lost.
<<Excerpt of code at 'JBD: commit phase 7'>>
> spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
> while (commit_transaction->t_forget) {
> transaction_t *cp_transaction;
> struct buffer_head *bh;
>
> jh = commit_transaction->t_forget;
>...
> if (buffer_freed(bh)) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_freed(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_jbddirty(bh);
> }
>
> if (buffer_jbddirty(bh)) {
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "add to new checkpointing trans");
> __journal_insert_checkpoint(jh, commit_transaction);
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile for checkpoint writeback");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> } else {
> J_ASSERT_BH(bh, !buffer_dirty(bh));
> ...
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile or unfile freed buffer");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> if (!jh->b_transaction) {
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> /* needs a brelse */
> journal_remove_journal_head(bh);
> release_buffer_page(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> } else
> }
****************************************************************
* Apply the code of "^^^^^^" lines into 'JBD: commit phase 2' *
****************************************************************
At journal_commit_transaction() code, there is one extra message in the
series of jbd debug messages. ("JBD: commit phase 2") This patch fixes
it, too.
Signed-off-by: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-07-25 01:46:29 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: positively dispose the unmapped data buffers in journal_commit_transaction()
After ext3-ordered files are truncated, there is a possibility that the
pages which cannot be estimated still remain. Remaining pages can be
released when the system has really few memory. So, it is not memory
leakage. But the resource management software etc. may not work
correctly.
It is possible that journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release the buffers, and
the pages to which they belong because they are attached to a commiting
transaction and journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release them. To release
such the buffers and the pages later, journal_unmap_buffer() leaves it to
journal_commit_transaction(). (journal_unmap_buffer() puts the mark
'BH_Freed' to the buffers so that journal_commit_transaction() can
identify whether they can be released or not.)
In the journalled mode and the writeback mode, jbd does with only metadata
buffers. But in the ordered mode, jbd does with metadata buffers and also
data buffers.
Actually, journal_commit_transaction() releases only the metadata buffers
of which release is demanded by journal_unmap_buffer(), and also releases
the pages to which they belong if possible.
As a result, the data buffers of which release is demanded by
journal_unmap_buffer() remain after a transaction commits. And also the
pages to which they belong remain.
Such the remained pages don't have mapping any longer. Due to this fact,
there is a possibility that the pages which cannot be estimated remain.
The metadata buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which
they belong can be released at 'JBD: commit phase 7'.
Therefore, by applying the same code into 'JBD: commit phase 2' (where the
data buffers are done with), journal_commit_transaction() can also release
the data buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which they belong.
As a result, all the buffers marked 'BH_Freed' can be released, and also
all the pages to which these buffers belong can be released at
journal_commit_transaction(). So, the page which cannot be estimated is
lost.
<<Excerpt of code at 'JBD: commit phase 7'>>
> spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
> while (commit_transaction->t_forget) {
> transaction_t *cp_transaction;
> struct buffer_head *bh;
>
> jh = commit_transaction->t_forget;
>...
> if (buffer_freed(bh)) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_freed(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_jbddirty(bh);
> }
>
> if (buffer_jbddirty(bh)) {
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "add to new checkpointing trans");
> __journal_insert_checkpoint(jh, commit_transaction);
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile for checkpoint writeback");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> } else {
> J_ASSERT_BH(bh, !buffer_dirty(bh));
> ...
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile or unfile freed buffer");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> if (!jh->b_transaction) {
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> /* needs a brelse */
> journal_remove_journal_head(bh);
> release_buffer_page(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> } else
> }
****************************************************************
* Apply the code of "^^^^^^" lines into 'JBD: commit phase 2' *
****************************************************************
At journal_commit_transaction() code, there is one extra message in the
series of jbd debug messages. ("JBD: commit phase 2") This patch fixes
it, too.
Signed-off-by: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-07-25 01:46:29 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-08-02 12:01:03 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: positively dispose the unmapped data buffers in journal_commit_transaction()
After ext3-ordered files are truncated, there is a possibility that the
pages which cannot be estimated still remain. Remaining pages can be
released when the system has really few memory. So, it is not memory
leakage. But the resource management software etc. may not work
correctly.
It is possible that journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release the buffers, and
the pages to which they belong because they are attached to a commiting
transaction and journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release them. To release
such the buffers and the pages later, journal_unmap_buffer() leaves it to
journal_commit_transaction(). (journal_unmap_buffer() puts the mark
'BH_Freed' to the buffers so that journal_commit_transaction() can
identify whether they can be released or not.)
In the journalled mode and the writeback mode, jbd does with only metadata
buffers. But in the ordered mode, jbd does with metadata buffers and also
data buffers.
Actually, journal_commit_transaction() releases only the metadata buffers
of which release is demanded by journal_unmap_buffer(), and also releases
the pages to which they belong if possible.
As a result, the data buffers of which release is demanded by
journal_unmap_buffer() remain after a transaction commits. And also the
pages to which they belong remain.
Such the remained pages don't have mapping any longer. Due to this fact,
there is a possibility that the pages which cannot be estimated remain.
The metadata buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which
they belong can be released at 'JBD: commit phase 7'.
Therefore, by applying the same code into 'JBD: commit phase 2' (where the
data buffers are done with), journal_commit_transaction() can also release
the data buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which they belong.
As a result, all the buffers marked 'BH_Freed' can be released, and also
all the pages to which these buffers belong can be released at
journal_commit_transaction(). So, the page which cannot be estimated is
lost.
<<Excerpt of code at 'JBD: commit phase 7'>>
> spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
> while (commit_transaction->t_forget) {
> transaction_t *cp_transaction;
> struct buffer_head *bh;
>
> jh = commit_transaction->t_forget;
>...
> if (buffer_freed(bh)) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_freed(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_jbddirty(bh);
> }
>
> if (buffer_jbddirty(bh)) {
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "add to new checkpointing trans");
> __journal_insert_checkpoint(jh, commit_transaction);
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile for checkpoint writeback");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> } else {
> J_ASSERT_BH(bh, !buffer_dirty(bh));
> ...
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile or unfile freed buffer");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> if (!jh->b_transaction) {
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> /* needs a brelse */
> journal_remove_journal_head(bh);
> release_buffer_page(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> } else
> }
****************************************************************
* Apply the code of "^^^^^^" lines into 'JBD: commit phase 2' *
****************************************************************
At journal_commit_transaction() code, there is one extra message in the
series of jbd debug messages. ("JBD: commit phase 2") This patch fixes
it, too.
Signed-off-by: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-07-25 01:46:29 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-02-01 08:26:46 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-02-01 08:26:46 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-02-08 04:22:13 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-25 01:46:30 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-25 01:46:30 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-08-02 12:02:13 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: positively dispose the unmapped data buffers in journal_commit_transaction()
After ext3-ordered files are truncated, there is a possibility that the
pages which cannot be estimated still remain. Remaining pages can be
released when the system has really few memory. So, it is not memory
leakage. But the resource management software etc. may not work
correctly.
It is possible that journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release the buffers, and
the pages to which they belong because they are attached to a commiting
transaction and journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release them. To release
such the buffers and the pages later, journal_unmap_buffer() leaves it to
journal_commit_transaction(). (journal_unmap_buffer() puts the mark
'BH_Freed' to the buffers so that journal_commit_transaction() can
identify whether they can be released or not.)
In the journalled mode and the writeback mode, jbd does with only metadata
buffers. But in the ordered mode, jbd does with metadata buffers and also
data buffers.
Actually, journal_commit_transaction() releases only the metadata buffers
of which release is demanded by journal_unmap_buffer(), and also releases
the pages to which they belong if possible.
As a result, the data buffers of which release is demanded by
journal_unmap_buffer() remain after a transaction commits. And also the
pages to which they belong remain.
Such the remained pages don't have mapping any longer. Due to this fact,
there is a possibility that the pages which cannot be estimated remain.
The metadata buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which
they belong can be released at 'JBD: commit phase 7'.
Therefore, by applying the same code into 'JBD: commit phase 2' (where the
data buffers are done with), journal_commit_transaction() can also release
the data buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which they belong.
As a result, all the buffers marked 'BH_Freed' can be released, and also
all the pages to which these buffers belong can be released at
journal_commit_transaction(). So, the page which cannot be estimated is
lost.
<<Excerpt of code at 'JBD: commit phase 7'>>
> spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
> while (commit_transaction->t_forget) {
> transaction_t *cp_transaction;
> struct buffer_head *bh;
>
> jh = commit_transaction->t_forget;
>...
> if (buffer_freed(bh)) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_freed(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_jbddirty(bh);
> }
>
> if (buffer_jbddirty(bh)) {
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "add to new checkpointing trans");
> __journal_insert_checkpoint(jh, commit_transaction);
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile for checkpoint writeback");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> } else {
> J_ASSERT_BH(bh, !buffer_dirty(bh));
> ...
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile or unfile freed buffer");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> if (!jh->b_transaction) {
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> /* needs a brelse */
> journal_remove_journal_head(bh);
> release_buffer_page(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> } else
> }
****************************************************************
* Apply the code of "^^^^^^" lines into 'JBD: commit phase 2' *
****************************************************************
At journal_commit_transaction() code, there is one extra message in the
series of jbd debug messages. ("JBD: commit phase 2") This patch fixes
it, too.
Signed-off-by: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-07-25 01:46:29 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-12-22 01:11:50 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-25 01:46:30 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: positively dispose the unmapped data buffers in journal_commit_transaction()
After ext3-ordered files are truncated, there is a possibility that the
pages which cannot be estimated still remain. Remaining pages can be
released when the system has really few memory. So, it is not memory
leakage. But the resource management software etc. may not work
correctly.
It is possible that journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release the buffers, and
the pages to which they belong because they are attached to a commiting
transaction and journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release them. To release
such the buffers and the pages later, journal_unmap_buffer() leaves it to
journal_commit_transaction(). (journal_unmap_buffer() puts the mark
'BH_Freed' to the buffers so that journal_commit_transaction() can
identify whether they can be released or not.)
In the journalled mode and the writeback mode, jbd does with only metadata
buffers. But in the ordered mode, jbd does with metadata buffers and also
data buffers.
Actually, journal_commit_transaction() releases only the metadata buffers
of which release is demanded by journal_unmap_buffer(), and also releases
the pages to which they belong if possible.
As a result, the data buffers of which release is demanded by
journal_unmap_buffer() remain after a transaction commits. And also the
pages to which they belong remain.
Such the remained pages don't have mapping any longer. Due to this fact,
there is a possibility that the pages which cannot be estimated remain.
The metadata buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which
they belong can be released at 'JBD: commit phase 7'.
Therefore, by applying the same code into 'JBD: commit phase 2' (where the
data buffers are done with), journal_commit_transaction() can also release
the data buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which they belong.
As a result, all the buffers marked 'BH_Freed' can be released, and also
all the pages to which these buffers belong can be released at
journal_commit_transaction(). So, the page which cannot be estimated is
lost.
<<Excerpt of code at 'JBD: commit phase 7'>>
> spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
> while (commit_transaction->t_forget) {
> transaction_t *cp_transaction;
> struct buffer_head *bh;
>
> jh = commit_transaction->t_forget;
>...
> if (buffer_freed(bh)) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_freed(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_jbddirty(bh);
> }
>
> if (buffer_jbddirty(bh)) {
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "add to new checkpointing trans");
> __journal_insert_checkpoint(jh, commit_transaction);
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile for checkpoint writeback");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> } else {
> J_ASSERT_BH(bh, !buffer_dirty(bh));
> ...
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile or unfile freed buffer");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> if (!jh->b_transaction) {
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> /* needs a brelse */
> journal_remove_journal_head(bh);
> release_buffer_page(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> } else
> }
****************************************************************
* Apply the code of "^^^^^^" lines into 'JBD: commit phase 2' *
****************************************************************
At journal_commit_transaction() code, there is one extra message in the
series of jbd debug messages. ("JBD: commit phase 2") This patch fixes
it, too.
Signed-off-by: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-07-25 01:46:29 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: positively dispose the unmapped data buffers in journal_commit_transaction()
After ext3-ordered files are truncated, there is a possibility that the
pages which cannot be estimated still remain. Remaining pages can be
released when the system has really few memory. So, it is not memory
leakage. But the resource management software etc. may not work
correctly.
It is possible that journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release the buffers, and
the pages to which they belong because they are attached to a commiting
transaction and journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release them. To release
such the buffers and the pages later, journal_unmap_buffer() leaves it to
journal_commit_transaction(). (journal_unmap_buffer() puts the mark
'BH_Freed' to the buffers so that journal_commit_transaction() can
identify whether they can be released or not.)
In the journalled mode and the writeback mode, jbd does with only metadata
buffers. But in the ordered mode, jbd does with metadata buffers and also
data buffers.
Actually, journal_commit_transaction() releases only the metadata buffers
of which release is demanded by journal_unmap_buffer(), and also releases
the pages to which they belong if possible.
As a result, the data buffers of which release is demanded by
journal_unmap_buffer() remain after a transaction commits. And also the
pages to which they belong remain.
Such the remained pages don't have mapping any longer. Due to this fact,
there is a possibility that the pages which cannot be estimated remain.
The metadata buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which
they belong can be released at 'JBD: commit phase 7'.
Therefore, by applying the same code into 'JBD: commit phase 2' (where the
data buffers are done with), journal_commit_transaction() can also release
the data buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which they belong.
As a result, all the buffers marked 'BH_Freed' can be released, and also
all the pages to which these buffers belong can be released at
journal_commit_transaction(). So, the page which cannot be estimated is
lost.
<<Excerpt of code at 'JBD: commit phase 7'>>
> spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
> while (commit_transaction->t_forget) {
> transaction_t *cp_transaction;
> struct buffer_head *bh;
>
> jh = commit_transaction->t_forget;
>...
> if (buffer_freed(bh)) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_freed(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_jbddirty(bh);
> }
>
> if (buffer_jbddirty(bh)) {
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "add to new checkpointing trans");
> __journal_insert_checkpoint(jh, commit_transaction);
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile for checkpoint writeback");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> } else {
> J_ASSERT_BH(bh, !buffer_dirty(bh));
> ...
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile or unfile freed buffer");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> if (!jh->b_transaction) {
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> /* needs a brelse */
> journal_remove_journal_head(bh);
> release_buffer_page(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> } else
> }
****************************************************************
* Apply the code of "^^^^^^" lines into 'JBD: commit phase 2' *
****************************************************************
At journal_commit_transaction() code, there is one extra message in the
series of jbd debug messages. ("JBD: commit phase 2") This patch fixes
it, too.
Signed-off-by: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-07-25 01:46:29 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-01-30 13:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-25 01:46:30 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: improve fsync batching
There is a flaw with the way jbd handles fsync batching. If we fsync() a
file and we were not the last person to run fsync() on this fs then we
automatically sleep for 1 jiffie in order to wait for new writers to join
into the transaction before forcing the commit. The problem with this is
that with really fast storage (ie a Clariion) the time it takes to commit
a transaction to disk is way faster than 1 jiffie in most cases, so
sleeping means waiting longer with nothing to do than if we just committed
the transaction and kept going. Ric Wheeler noticed this when using
fs_mark with more than 1 thread, the throughput would plummet as he added
more threads.
This patch attempts to fix this problem by recording the average time in
nanoseconds that it takes to commit a transaction to disk, and what time
we started the transaction. If we run an fsync() and we have been running
for less time than it takes to commit the transaction to disk, we sleep
for the delta amount of time and then commit to disk. We acheive
sub-jiffie sleeping using schedule_hrtimeout. This means that the wait
time is auto-tuned to the speed of the underlying disk, instead of having
this static timeout. I weighted the average according to somebody's
comments (Andreas Dilger I think) in order to help normalize random
outliers where we take way longer or way less time to commit than the
average. I also have a min() check in there to make sure we don't sleep
longer than a jiffie in case our storage is super slow, this was requested
by Andrew.
I unfortunately do not have access to a Clariion, so I had to use a
ramdisk to represent a super fast array. I tested with a SATA drive with
barrier=1 to make sure there was no regression with local disks, I tested
with a 4 way multipathed Apple Xserve RAID array and of course the
ramdisk. I ran the following command
fs_mark -d /mnt/ext3-test -s 4096 -n 2000 -D 64 -t $i
where $i was 2, 4, 8, 16 and 32. I mkfs'ed the fs each time. Here are my
results
type threads with patch without patch
sata 2 24.6 26.3
sata 4 49.2 48.1
sata 8 70.1 67.0
sata 16 104.0 94.1
sata 32 153.6 142.7
xserve 2 246.4 222.0
xserve 4 480.0 440.8
xserve 8 829.5 730.8
xserve 16 1172.7 1026.9
xserve 32 1816.3 1650.5
ramdisk 2 2538.3 1745.6
ramdisk 4 2942.3 661.9
ramdisk 8 2882.5 999.8
ramdisk 16 2738.7 1801.9
ramdisk 32 2541.9 2394.0
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@redhat.com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@sun.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-01-07 18:07:24 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-10-16 18:38:25 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2005-11-07 01:01:34 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: improve fsync batching
There is a flaw with the way jbd handles fsync batching. If we fsync() a
file and we were not the last person to run fsync() on this fs then we
automatically sleep for 1 jiffie in order to wait for new writers to join
into the transaction before forcing the commit. The problem with this is
that with really fast storage (ie a Clariion) the time it takes to commit
a transaction to disk is way faster than 1 jiffie in most cases, so
sleeping means waiting longer with nothing to do than if we just committed
the transaction and kept going. Ric Wheeler noticed this when using
fs_mark with more than 1 thread, the throughput would plummet as he added
more threads.
This patch attempts to fix this problem by recording the average time in
nanoseconds that it takes to commit a transaction to disk, and what time
we started the transaction. If we run an fsync() and we have been running
for less time than it takes to commit the transaction to disk, we sleep
for the delta amount of time and then commit to disk. We acheive
sub-jiffie sleeping using schedule_hrtimeout. This means that the wait
time is auto-tuned to the speed of the underlying disk, instead of having
this static timeout. I weighted the average according to somebody's
comments (Andreas Dilger I think) in order to help normalize random
outliers where we take way longer or way less time to commit than the
average. I also have a min() check in there to make sure we don't sleep
longer than a jiffie in case our storage is super slow, this was requested
by Andrew.
I unfortunately do not have access to a Clariion, so I had to use a
ramdisk to represent a super fast array. I tested with a SATA drive with
barrier=1 to make sure there was no regression with local disks, I tested
with a 4 way multipathed Apple Xserve RAID array and of course the
ramdisk. I ran the following command
fs_mark -d /mnt/ext3-test -s 4096 -n 2000 -D 64 -t $i
where $i was 2, 4, 8, 16 and 32. I mkfs'ed the fs each time. Here are my
results
type threads with patch without patch
sata 2 24.6 26.3
sata 4 49.2 48.1
sata 8 70.1 67.0
sata 16 104.0 94.1
sata 32 153.6 142.7
xserve 2 246.4 222.0
xserve 4 480.0 440.8
xserve 8 829.5 730.8
xserve 16 1172.7 1026.9
xserve 32 1816.3 1650.5
ramdisk 2 2538.3 1745.6
ramdisk 4 2942.3 661.9
ramdisk 8 2882.5 999.8
ramdisk 16 2738.7 1801.9
ramdisk 32 2541.9 2394.0
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@redhat.com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@sun.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-01-07 18:07:24 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-25 01:46:30 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-09-25 23:30:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-25 01:46:30 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2008-08-02 12:01:03 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-25 01:46:30 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: positively dispose the unmapped data buffers in journal_commit_transaction()
After ext3-ordered files are truncated, there is a possibility that the
pages which cannot be estimated still remain. Remaining pages can be
released when the system has really few memory. So, it is not memory
leakage. But the resource management software etc. may not work
correctly.
It is possible that journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release the buffers, and
the pages to which they belong because they are attached to a commiting
transaction and journal_unmap_buffer() cannot release them. To release
such the buffers and the pages later, journal_unmap_buffer() leaves it to
journal_commit_transaction(). (journal_unmap_buffer() puts the mark
'BH_Freed' to the buffers so that journal_commit_transaction() can
identify whether they can be released or not.)
In the journalled mode and the writeback mode, jbd does with only metadata
buffers. But in the ordered mode, jbd does with metadata buffers and also
data buffers.
Actually, journal_commit_transaction() releases only the metadata buffers
of which release is demanded by journal_unmap_buffer(), and also releases
the pages to which they belong if possible.
As a result, the data buffers of which release is demanded by
journal_unmap_buffer() remain after a transaction commits. And also the
pages to which they belong remain.
Such the remained pages don't have mapping any longer. Due to this fact,
there is a possibility that the pages which cannot be estimated remain.
The metadata buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which
they belong can be released at 'JBD: commit phase 7'.
Therefore, by applying the same code into 'JBD: commit phase 2' (where the
data buffers are done with), journal_commit_transaction() can also release
the data buffers marked 'BH_Freed' and the pages to which they belong.
As a result, all the buffers marked 'BH_Freed' can be released, and also
all the pages to which these buffers belong can be released at
journal_commit_transaction(). So, the page which cannot be estimated is
lost.
<<Excerpt of code at 'JBD: commit phase 7'>>
> spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
> while (commit_transaction->t_forget) {
> transaction_t *cp_transaction;
> struct buffer_head *bh;
>
> jh = commit_transaction->t_forget;
>...
> if (buffer_freed(bh)) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_freed(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear_buffer_jbddirty(bh);
> }
>
> if (buffer_jbddirty(bh)) {
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "add to new checkpointing trans");
> __journal_insert_checkpoint(jh, commit_transaction);
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile for checkpoint writeback");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> } else {
> J_ASSERT_BH(bh, !buffer_dirty(bh));
> ...
> JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "refile or unfile freed buffer");
> __journal_refile_buffer(jh);
> if (!jh->b_transaction) {
> jbd_unlock_bh_state(bh);
> /* needs a brelse */
> journal_remove_journal_head(bh);
> release_buffer_page(bh);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> } else
> }
****************************************************************
* Apply the code of "^^^^^^" lines into 'JBD: commit phase 2' *
****************************************************************
At journal_commit_transaction() code, there is one extra message in the
series of jbd debug messages. ("JBD: commit phase 2") This patch fixes
it, too.
Signed-off-by: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-07-25 01:46:29 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-25 01:46:30 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-10-18 20:27:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-25 01:46:30 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-05-14 16:05:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2008-05-14 16:05:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
jbd: fix possible journal overflow issues
There are several cases where the running transaction can get buffers added to
its BJ_Metadata list which it never dirtied, which makes its t_nr_buffers
counter end up larger than its t_outstanding_credits counter.
This will cause issues when starting new transactions as while we are logging
buffers we decrement t_outstanding_buffers, so when t_outstanding_buffers goes
negative, we will report that we need less space in the journal than we
actually need, so transactions will be started even though there may not be
enough room for them. In the worst case scenario (which admittedly is almost
impossible to reproduce) this will result in the journal running out of space.
The fix is to only
refile buffers from the committing transaction to the running transactions
BJ_Modified list when b_modified is set on that journal, which is the only way
to be sure if the running transaction has modified that buffer.
This patch also fixes an accounting error in journal_forget, it is possible
that we can call journal_forget on a buffer without having modified it, only
gotten write access to it, so instead of freeing a credit, we only do so if
the buffer was modified. The assert will help catch if this problem occurs.
Without these two patches I could hit this assert within minutes of running
postmark, with them this issue no longer arises. Thank you,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@redhat.com>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:16:12 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-10-18 20:27:54 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-10-18 20:27:54 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-10-18 23:39:22 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-10-18 23:39:22 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-10-18 20:27:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-10-18 23:39:22 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-09-06 15:19:09 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-09-06 15:19:09 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-10-16 18:38:25 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-10-16 18:38:25 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-10-18 20:27:54 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-06-23 02:05:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-09-06 15:19:09 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-12-04 23:45:27 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-09-06 15:19:09 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-09-06 15:19:09 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbd: improve fsync batching
There is a flaw with the way jbd handles fsync batching. If we fsync() a
file and we were not the last person to run fsync() on this fs then we
automatically sleep for 1 jiffie in order to wait for new writers to join
into the transaction before forcing the commit. The problem with this is
that with really fast storage (ie a Clariion) the time it takes to commit
a transaction to disk is way faster than 1 jiffie in most cases, so
sleeping means waiting longer with nothing to do than if we just committed
the transaction and kept going. Ric Wheeler noticed this when using
fs_mark with more than 1 thread, the throughput would plummet as he added
more threads.
This patch attempts to fix this problem by recording the average time in
nanoseconds that it takes to commit a transaction to disk, and what time
we started the transaction. If we run an fsync() and we have been running
for less time than it takes to commit the transaction to disk, we sleep
for the delta amount of time and then commit to disk. We acheive
sub-jiffie sleeping using schedule_hrtimeout. This means that the wait
time is auto-tuned to the speed of the underlying disk, instead of having
this static timeout. I weighted the average according to somebody's
comments (Andreas Dilger I think) in order to help normalize random
outliers where we take way longer or way less time to commit than the
average. I also have a min() check in there to make sure we don't sleep
longer than a jiffie in case our storage is super slow, this was requested
by Andrew.
I unfortunately do not have access to a Clariion, so I had to use a
ramdisk to represent a super fast array. I tested with a SATA drive with
barrier=1 to make sure there was no regression with local disks, I tested
with a 4 way multipathed Apple Xserve RAID array and of course the
ramdisk. I ran the following command
fs_mark -d /mnt/ext3-test -s 4096 -n 2000 -D 64 -t $i
where $i was 2, 4, 8, 16 and 32. I mkfs'ed the fs each time. Here are my
results
type threads with patch without patch
sata 2 24.6 26.3
sata 4 49.2 48.1
sata 8 70.1 67.0
sata 16 104.0 94.1
sata 32 153.6 142.7
xserve 2 246.4 222.0
xserve 4 480.0 440.8
xserve 8 829.5 730.8
xserve 16 1172.7 1026.9
xserve 32 1816.3 1650.5
ramdisk 2 2538.3 1745.6
ramdisk 4 2942.3 661.9
ramdisk 8 2882.5 999.8
ramdisk 16 2738.7 1801.9
ramdisk 32 2541.9 2394.0
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@redhat.com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@sun.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-01-07 18:07:24 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-15 23:37:18 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
