From: Boaz Harrosh <ooo@electrozaur.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Benny Halevy <bhalevy@primarydata.com>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
osd-dev@open-osd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] osd fs: __r4w_get_page rely on PageUptodate for uptodate
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 12:00:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5635E2B4.5070308@electrozaur.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1510291137430.3369@eggly.anvils>
On 10/29/2015 08:43 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Patch "mm: migrate dirty page without clear_page_dirty_for_io etc",
> presently staged in mmotm and linux-next, simplifies the migration of
> a PageDirty pagecache page: one stat needs moving from zone to zone
> and that's about all.
>
> It's convenient and safest for it to shift the PageDirty bit from old
> page to new, just before updating the zone stats: before copying data
> and marking the new PageUptodate. This is all done while both pages
> are isolated and locked, just as before; and just as before, there's
> a moment when the new page is visible in the radix_tree, but not yet
> PageUptodate. What's new is that it may now be briefly visible as
> PageDirty before it is PageUptodate.
>
> When I scoured the tree to see if this could cause a problem anywhere,
> the only places I found were in two similar functions __r4w_get_page():
> which look up a page with find_get_page() (not using page lock), then
> claim it's uptodate if it's PageDirty or PageWriteback or PageUptodate.
>
> I'm not sure whether that was right before, but now it might be wrong
> (on rare occasions): only claim the page is uptodate if PageUptodate.
> Or perhaps the page in question could never be migratable anyway?
>
Hi Sir Hugh
I'm sorry, I admit the code is clear as mud, but your patch below is wrong.
The *uptodate return from __r4w_get_page is not really "up-to-date" at all
actually it means: "do we need to read the page from storage" writable/dirty pages
we do not read from storage but use the newest data in memory.
r4w means read-for-write which is when we need to bring in the full stripe to
re-calculate raid5/6 . (when only the partial stripe is written)
The scenario below of: "briefly visible as PageDirty before it is PageUptodate"
is fine in this case because in both cases we do not need to read the page.
Thanks for looking
Boaz
> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
This patch is not correct!
> ---
>
> fs/exofs/inode.c | 5 +----
> fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c | 5 +----
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> --- 4.3-next/fs/exofs/inode.c 2015-08-30 11:34:09.000000000 -0700
> +++ linux/fs/exofs/inode.c 2015-10-28 16:55:18.795554294 -0700
> @@ -592,10 +592,7 @@ static struct page *__r4w_get_page(void
> }
> unlock_page(page);
> }
> - if (PageDirty(page) || PageWriteback(page))
> - *uptodate = true;
> - else
> - *uptodate = PageUptodate(page);
> + *uptodate = PageUptodate(page);
> EXOFS_DBGMSG2("index=0x%lx uptodate=%d\n", index, *uptodate);
> return page;
> } else {
> --- 4.3-next/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c 2015-10-21 18:35:07.620645439 -0700
> +++ linux/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c 2015-10-28 16:53:55.083686639 -0700
> @@ -476,10 +476,7 @@ static struct page *__r4w_get_page(void
> }
> unlock_page(page);
> }
> - if (PageDirty(page) || PageWriteback(page))
> - *uptodate = true;
> - else
> - *uptodate = PageUptodate(page);
> + *uptodate = PageUptodate(page);
> dprintk("%s: index=0x%lx uptodate=%d\n", __func__, index, *uptodate);
> return page;
> }
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-01 10:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-29 18:43 Hugh Dickins
2015-11-01 10:00 ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
2015-11-01 23:39 ` Hugh Dickins
2015-11-02 11:05 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-11-03 2:49 ` Hugh Dickins
2015-11-03 9:24 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-11-03 15:39 ` Hugh Dickins
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=5635E2B4.5070308@electrozaur.com \
--to=ooo@electrozaur.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhalevy@primarydata.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=osd-dev@open-osd.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@primarydata.com \
/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