| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
|
There are loads of functions in btrfs that accept a root parameter
but only use it to obtain an fs_info pointer. Let's convert those to
just accept an fs_info pointer directly.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
|
A refactor patch, and avoids user input verification in the
btrfs_dev_replace_start(), and so this function can be reused.
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
|
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 084b6e7c7607 ("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>
|
|
This adds a new file to the sources together with the header file
and the changes to ioctl.h and ctree.h that are required by the
new C source file. Additionally, 4 new functions are added to
volume.c that deal with device creation and destruction.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
|
|
The device replace procedure makes use of the scrub code. The scrub
code is the most efficient code to read the allocated data of a disk,
i.e. it reads sequentially in order to avoid disk head movements, it
skips unallocated blocks, it uses read ahead mechanisms, and it
contains all the code to detect and repair defects.
This commit adds code to scrub to allow the scrub code to copy read
data to another disk.
One goal is to be able to perform as fast as possible. Therefore the
write requests are collected until huge bios are built, and the
write process is decoupled from the read process with some kind of
flow control, of course, in order to limit the allocated memory.
The best performance on spinning disks could by reached when the
head movements are avoided as much as possible. Therefore a single
worker is used to interface the read process with the write process.
The regular scrub operation works as fast as before, it is not
negatively influenced and actually it is more or less unchanged.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
|
