From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: jack@suse.cz, tytso@mit.edu, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca,
mcgrof@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, hare@suse.de,
djwong@kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/7] fs/buffer: split pagecache lookups into atomic or blocking
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 11:58:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250417-jagdhund-ruhmreich-f1c979cdd58d@brauner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250415231635.83960-1-dave@stgolabs.net>
On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 04:16:28PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is a respin of the series[0] to address the sleep in atomic scenarios for
> noref migration with large folios, introduced in:
>
> 3c20917120ce61 ("block/bdev: enable large folio support for large logical block sizes")
Please resend based on vfs.fixes.
> The main difference is that it removes the first patch and moves the fix (reducing
> the i_private_lock critical region in the migration path) to the final patch, which
> also introduces the new BH_Migrate flag. It also simplifies the locking scheme in
> patch 1 to avoid folio trylocking in the atomic lookup cases. So essentially blocking
> users will take the folio lock and hence wait for migration, and otherwise nonblocking
> callers will bail the lookup if a noref migration is on-going. Blocking callers
> will also benefit from potential performance gains by reducing contention on the
> spinlock for bdev mappings.
>
> It is noteworthy that this series is probably too big for Linus' tree, so there are
> two options:
>
> 1. Revert 3c20917120ce61, add this series + 3c20917120ce61 for next. Or,
> 2. Cherry pick patch 7 as a fix for Linus' tree, and leave the rest for next.
> But that could break lookup callers that have been deemed unfit to bail.
>
> Patch 1: carves a path for callers that can block to take the folio lock.
> Patch 2: adds sleeping flavors to pagecache lookups, no users.
> Patches 3-6: converts to the new call, where possible.
> Patch 7: does the actual sleep in atomic fix.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250410014945.2140781-1-mcgrof@kernel.org/
>
> Davidlohr Bueso (7):
> fs/buffer: split locking for pagecache lookups
> fs/buffer: introduce sleeping flavors for pagecache lookups
> fs/buffer: use sleeping version of __find_get_block()
> fs/ocfs2: use sleeping version of __find_get_block()
> fs/jbd2: use sleeping version of __find_get_block()
> fs/ext4: use sleeping version of sb_find_get_block()
> mm/migrate: fix sleep in atomic for large folios and buffer heads
>
> fs/buffer.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> fs/ext4/ialloc.c | 3 +-
> fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 3 +-
> fs/jbd2/revoke.c | 15 +++++---
> fs/ocfs2/journal.c | 2 +-
> include/linux/buffer_head.h | 9 +++++
> mm/migrate.c | 8 ++--
> 7 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.39.5
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-17 9:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-15 23:16 Davidlohr Bueso
2025-04-15 23:16 ` [PATCH 1/7] fs/buffer: split locking for pagecache lookups Davidlohr Bueso
2025-04-16 9:32 ` Jan Kara
2025-04-15 23:16 ` [PATCH 2/7] fs/buffer: introduce sleeping flavors " Davidlohr Bueso
2025-04-16 9:33 ` Jan Kara
2025-04-15 23:16 ` [PATCH 3/7] fs/buffer: use sleeping version of __find_get_block() Davidlohr Bueso
2025-04-16 9:33 ` Jan Kara
2025-04-15 23:16 ` [PATCH 4/7] fs/ocfs2: " Davidlohr Bueso
2025-04-16 9:35 ` Jan Kara
2025-04-15 23:16 ` [PATCH 5/7] fs/jbd2: " Davidlohr Bueso
2025-04-16 9:38 ` Jan Kara
2025-04-15 23:16 ` [PATCH 6/7] fs/ext4: use sleeping version of sb_find_get_block() Davidlohr Bueso
2025-04-16 9:39 ` Jan Kara
2025-04-15 23:16 ` [PATCH 7/7] mm/migrate: fix sleep in atomic for large folios and buffer heads Davidlohr Bueso
2025-04-16 9:43 ` Jan Kara
2025-04-16 19:27 ` [PATCH -next 0/7] fs/buffer: split pagecache lookups into atomic or blocking Luis Chamberlain
2025-04-17 9:57 ` Christian Brauner
2025-04-22 11:25 ` Jan Kara
2025-04-17 9:58 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250417-jagdhund-ruhmreich-f1c979cdd58d@brauner \
--to=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox