PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time
ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page
cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE.
This promise never materialized. And unlikely will.
We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to
PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether
PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case,
especially on the border between fs and mm.
Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much
breakage to be doable.
Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are
not.
The changes are pretty straight-forward:
- <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;
- <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;
- PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN};
- page_cache_get() -> get_page();
- page_cache_release() -> put_page();
This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using
script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files.
I've called spatch for them manually.
The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to
PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later.
There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll
fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also
will be addressed with the separate patch.
virtual patch
@@
expression E;
@@
- E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E
@@
expression E;
@@
- E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT
+ PAGE_SHIFT
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SIZE
+ PAGE_SIZE
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_MASK
+ PAGE_MASK
@@
expression E;
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E)
+ PAGE_ALIGN(E)
@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_get(E)
+ get_page(E)
@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_release(E)
+ put_page(E)
Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Xfstests btrfs/011 complains about a deadlock warning,
[ 1226.649039] =========================================================
[ 1226.649039] [ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
[ 1226.649039] 4.1.0+ #270 Not tainted
[ 1226.649039] ---------------------------------------------------------
[ 1226.652955] kswapd0/46 just changed the state of lock:
[ 1226.652955] (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.-.}, at: [<ffffffff81458735>] __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x45/0x1d0
[ 1226.652955] but this lock took another, RECLAIM_FS-unsafe lock in the past:
[ 1226.652955] (&fs_info->dev_replace.lock){+.+.+.}
and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.
[ 1226.652955]
other info that might help us debug this:
[ 1226.652955] Chain exists of:
&delayed_node->mutex --> &found->groups_sem --> &fs_info->dev_replace.lock
[ 1226.652955] Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
[ 1226.652955] CPU0 CPU1
[ 1226.652955] ---- ----
[ 1226.652955] lock(&fs_info->dev_replace.lock);
[ 1226.652955] local_irq_disable();
[ 1226.652955] lock(&delayed_node->mutex);
[ 1226.652955] lock(&found->groups_sem);
[ 1226.652955] <Interrupt>
[ 1226.652955] lock(&delayed_node->mutex);
[ 1226.652955]
*** DEADLOCK ***
Commit 084b6e7c76 ("btrfs: Fix a lockdep warning when running xfstest.") tried
to fix a similar one that has the exactly same warning, but with that, we still
run to this.
The above lock chain comes from
btrfs_commit_transaction
->btrfs_run_delayed_items
...
->__btrfs_update_delayed_inode
...
->__btrfs_cow_block
...
->find_free_extent
->cache_block_group
->load_free_space_cache
->btrfs_readpages
->submit_one_bio
...
->__btrfs_map_block
->btrfs_dev_replace_lock
However, with high memory pressure, tasks which hold dev_replace.lock can
be interrupted by kswapd and then kswapd is intended to release memory occupied
by superblock, inodes and dentries, where we may call evict_inode, and it comes
to
[ 1226.652955] [<ffffffff81458735>] __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x45/0x1d0
[ 1226.652955] [<ffffffff81459e74>] btrfs_remove_delayed_node+0x24/0x30
[ 1226.652955] [<ffffffff8140c5fe>] btrfs_evict_inode+0x34e/0x700
delayed_node->mutex may be acquired in __btrfs_release_delayed_node(), and it leads
to a ABBA deadlock.
To fix this, we can use "blocking rwlock" used in the case of extent_buffer, but
things are simpler here since we only needs read's spinlock to blocking lock.
With this, btrfs/011 no more produces warnings in dmesg.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
For a non-existent device, old code bypasses adding it in dev's reada
queue.
And to solve problem of unfinished waitting in raid5/6,
commit 5fbc7c59fd ("Btrfs: fix unfinished readahead thread for
raid5/6 degraded mounting")
adding an exception for the first stripe, in short, the first
stripe will always be processed whether the device exists or not.
Actually we have a better way for the above request: just bypass
creation of the reada_extent for non-existent device, it will make
code simple and effective.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Reada background works is not designed to finish all jobs
completely, it will break in following case:
1: When a device reaches workload limit (MAX_IN_FLIGHT)
2: Total reads reach max limit (10000)
3: All devices don't have queued more jobs, often happened in DUP case
And if all background works exit with remaining jobs,
btrfs_reada_wait() will wait indefinetelly.
Above problem is rarely happened in old code, because:
1: Every work queues 2x new works
So many works reduced chances of undone jobs.
2: One work will continue 10000 times loop in case of no-jobs
It reduced no-thread window time.
But after we fixed above case, the "undone reada extents" frequently
happened.
Fix:
Check to ensure we have at least one thread if there are undone jobs
in btrfs_reada_wait().
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Reada creates 2 works for each level of tree recursively.
In case of a tree having many levels, the number of created works
is 2^level_of_tree.
Actually we don't need so many works in parallel, this patch limits
max works to BTRFS_MAX_MIRRORS * 2.
The per-fs works_counter will be also used for btrfs_reada_wait() to
check is there are background workers.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
No need to decrease dev->reada_in_flight in __readahead_hook()'s
internal and reada_extent_put().
reada_extent_put() have no chance to decrease dev->reada_in_flight
in free operation, because reada_extent have additional refcnt when
scheduled to a dev.
We can put inc and dec operation for dev->reada_in_flight to one
place instead to make logic simple and safe, and move useless
reada_extent->scheduled_for to a bool flag instead.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Remove one copy of loop to fix the typo of iterate zones.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Current code set nritems to 0 to make for_loop useless to bypass it,
and set generation's value which is not necessary.
Jump into cleanup directly is better choise.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
What __readahead_hook() need exactly is fs_info, no need to convert
fs_info to root in caller and convert back in __readahead_hook()
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
reada_start_machine_dev() already have reada_extent pointer, pass
it into __readahead_hook() directly instead of search radix_tree
will make code run faster.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
We can't release reada_extent earlier than __readahead_hook(), because
__readahead_hook() still need to use it, it is necessary to hode a refcnt
to avoid it be freed.
Actually it is not a problem after my patch named:
Avoid many times of empty loop
It make reada_extent in above line include at least one reada_extctl,
which keeps additional one refcnt for reada_extent.
But we still need this patch to make the code in pretty logic.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
level is not used in severial functions, remove them from arguments,
and remove relative code for get its value.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
When failed adding all dev_zones for a reada_extent, the extent
will have no chance to be selected to run, and keep in memory
for ever.
We should bypass this extent to avoid above case.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
If some device is not reachable, we should bypass and continus addingb
next, instead of break on bad device.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Move is_need_to_readahead contition earlier to avoid useless loop
to get relative data for readahead.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
We can see following loop(10000 times) in trace_log:
[ 75.416137] ZL_DEBUG: reada_start_machine_dev:730: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re->ref_cnt ffff88003741e0c0 1 -> 2
[ 75.417413] ZL_DEBUG: reada_extent_put:524: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re = ffff88003741e0c0, refcnt = 2 -> 1
[ 75.418611] ZL_DEBUG: __readahead_hook:129: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re->ref_cnt ffff88003741e0c0 1 -> 2
[ 75.419793] ZL_DEBUG: reada_extent_put:524: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re = ffff88003741e0c0, refcnt = 2 -> 1
[ 75.421016] ZL_DEBUG: reada_start_machine_dev:730: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re->ref_cnt ffff88003741e0c0 1 -> 2
[ 75.422324] ZL_DEBUG: reada_extent_put:524: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re = ffff88003741e0c0, refcnt = 2 -> 1
[ 75.423661] ZL_DEBUG: __readahead_hook:129: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re->ref_cnt ffff88003741e0c0 1 -> 2
[ 75.424882] ZL_DEBUG: reada_extent_put:524: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re = ffff88003741e0c0, refcnt = 2 -> 1
...(10000 times)
[ 124.101672] ZL_DEBUG: reada_start_machine_dev:730: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re->ref_cnt ffff88003741e0c0 1 -> 2
[ 124.102850] ZL_DEBUG: reada_extent_put:524: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re = ffff88003741e0c0, refcnt = 2 -> 1
[ 124.104008] ZL_DEBUG: __readahead_hook:129: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re->ref_cnt ffff88003741e0c0 1 -> 2
[ 124.105121] ZL_DEBUG: reada_extent_put:524: pid=771 comm=kworker/u2:3 re = ffff88003741e0c0, refcnt = 2 -> 1
Reason:
If more than one user trigger reada in same extent, the first task
finished setting of reada data struct and call reada_start_machine()
to start, and the second task only add a ref_count but have not
add reada_extctl struct completely, the reada_extent can not finished
all jobs, and will be selected in __reada_start_machine() for 10000
times(total times in __reada_start_machine()).
Fix:
For a reada_extent without job, we don't need to run it, just return
0 to let caller break.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
In rechecking zone-in-tree, we still need to check zone include
our logical address.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
We can avoid additional locking-acquirment and one pair of
kref_get/put by combine two condition.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
reada_zone->end is end pos of segment:
end = start + cache->key.offset - 1;
So we need to use "<=" in condition to judge is a pos in the
segment.
The problem happened rearly, because logical pos rarely pointed
to last 4k of a blockgroup, but we need to fix it to make code
right in logic.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
The readahead framework is not on the critical writeback path we don't
need to use GFP_NOFS for allocations. All error paths are handled and
the readahead failures are not fatal. The actual users (scrub,
dev-replace) will trigger reads if the blocks are not found in cache.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
reada is using -1 instead of the -ENOMEM defined macro to specify that
a buffer allocation failed. Since the error number is propagated, the
caller will get a -EPERM which is the wrong error condition.
Also, updating the caller to return the exact value from
reada_add_block.
Smatch tool warning:
reada_add_block() warn: returning -1 instead of -ENOMEM is sloppy
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Luis de Bethencourt <luisbg@osg.samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Commit 5fbc7c59fd ("Btrfs: fix unfinished readahead thread for raid5/6
degraded mounting") fixed a problem where we would skip a missing device
when we shouldn't have because there are no other mirrors to read from
in RAID 5/6. After commit 2c8cdd6ee4 ("Btrfs, replace: write dirty
pages into the replace target device"), the fix doesn't work when we're
doing a missing device replace on RAID 5/6 because the replace device is
counted as a mirror so we're tricked into thinking we can safely skip
the missing device. The fix is to count only the real stripes and decide
based on that.
Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval <osandov@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Filipe Manana
Kirill A. Shutemov
David Sterba
Liu Bo
Zhao Lei
Luis de Bethencourt
Omar Sandoval