Re: [PATCH 04/11] writeback: make wb_writeback() take an argumentstructure

[Jens Axboe]

On Wed, Sep 16 2009, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 15-09-09 20:16:50, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > We need to be able to pass in range_cyclic as well, so instead
> > of growing yet another argument, split the arguments into a
> > struct wb_writeback_args structure that we can use internally.
> > Also makes it easier to just copy all members to an on-stack
> > struct, since we can't access work after clearing the pending
> > bit.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  fs/fs-writeback.c |   97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> >  1 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > index 783ed44..1dd11d1 100644
> > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > @@ -35,6 +35,17 @@
> >  int nr_pdflush_threads;
> >  
> >  /*
> > + * Passed into wb_writeback(), essentially a subset of writeback_control
> > + */
> > +struct wb_writeback_args {
> > +	long nr_pages;
> > +	struct super_block *sb;
> > +	enum writeback_sync_modes sync_mode;
> > +	int for_kupdate;
> > +	int range_cyclic;
> > +};
>   You can save a few bytes by using bit-fields for for_kupdate and
> range_cyclic fields the same way as is done in wbc.

I was unsure whether that would be reliable for copying. Seems it
should.

> > @@ -69,9 +78,10 @@ static inline void bdi_work_init(struct bdi_work *work,
> >  				 struct writeback_control *wbc)
> >  {
> >  	INIT_RCU_HEAD(&work->rcu_head);
> > -	work->sb = wbc->sb;
> > -	work->nr_pages = wbc->nr_to_write;
> > -	work->sync_mode = wbc->sync_mode;
> > +	work->args.sb = wbc->sb;
> > +	work->args.nr_pages = wbc->nr_to_write;
> > +	work->args.sync_mode = wbc->sync_mode;
> > +	work->args.range_cyclic = wbc->range_cyclic;
> >  	work->state = WS_USED;
> >  }
>   We don't pass for_kupdate here. But probably that's fine since noone else
> should set it. But maybe we should at least initialize it?

Good idea, will set it.

> > @@ -673,29 +682,35 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writeback *wb, long nr_pages,
> >  		oldest_jif = jiffies -
> >  				msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_expire_interval * 10);
> >  	}
> > +	if (!wbc.range_cyclic) {
> > +		wbc.range_start = 0;
> > +		wbc.range_end = LLONG_MAX;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	for (;;) {
> > -		/*
> > -		 * Don't flush anything for non-integrity writeback where
> > -		 * no nr_pages was given
> > -		 */
> > -		if (!for_kupdate && nr_pages <= 0 && sync_mode == WB_SYNC_NONE)
> > -			break;
> > +		if (!args->for_kupdate && args->nr_pages <= 0) {
> > +			/*
> > +			 * Don't flush anything for non-integrity writeback
> > +			 * where no nr_pages was given
> > +			 */
> > +			if (args->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_NONE)
> > +				break;
> >  
> > -		/*
> > -		 * If no specific pages were given and this is just a
> > -		 * periodic background writeout and we are below the
> > -		 * background dirty threshold, don't do anything
> > -		 */
> > -		if (for_kupdate && nr_pages <= 0 && !over_bground_thresh())
> > -			break;
> > +			/*
> > +			 * If no specific pages were given and this is just a
> > +			 * periodic background writeout and we are below the
> > +			 * background dirty threshold, don't do anything
> > +			 */
> > +			if (!over_bground_thresh())
> > +				break;
> > +		}
>   This chunk actually changes the behavior since previously the second
> condition had for_kupdate and not !for_kupdate. But revisiting this code,
> the pdflush-style writeback still doesn't work how it used to. Merging
> kupdate-style and pdflush-style writeback isn't that easy.
>   For the first one we want to flush only the expired inodes, but we should
> guarantee we really flush them.
>   For the second one we want to flush as much data as possible and don't
> really care about which inodes we flush. We only have to work until we hit
> the background threshold.
>   So probably check_old_data_flush() has to issue a kupdate-style writeback
> like it does now and then it should loop submitting normal WB_SYNC_NONE
> writeback until we get below background threshold. In theory, we could use
> the look in wb_writeback() like we try now but that would mean we have to
> pass another flag, whether this is a pdflush style writeback or not.

Good spotting, I'll fix that up and have the old flush continue until
!over_bground_thresh(). It would be nice to get rid of the weird special
casing in wb_writeback() and just retain it as a worker, pushing the
logic into the internal callers.

> >  		wbc.more_io = 0;
> >  		wbc.encountered_congestion = 0;
> >  		wbc.nr_to_write = MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES;
> >  		wbc.pages_skipped = 0;
> >  		writeback_inodes_wb(wb, &wbc);
> > -		nr_pages -= MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES - wbc.nr_to_write;
> > +		args->nr_pages -= MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES - wbc.nr_to_write;
> >  		wrote += MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES - wbc.nr_to_write;
> >  
> >  		/*
> > @@ -749,8 +764,14 @@ static long wb_check_old_data_flush(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
> >  			global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS) +
> >  			(inodes_stat.nr_inodes - inodes_stat.nr_unused);
> >  
> > -	if (nr_pages)
> > -		return wb_writeback(wb, nr_pages, NULL, WB_SYNC_NONE, 1);
> > +	if (nr_pages) {
> > +		struct wb_writeback_args args = {
> > +			.nr_pages	= nr_pages,
> > +			.sync_mode	= WB_SYNC_NONE,
> > +		};
>   We should set for_kupdate here.

Indeed, thanks.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/