On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 1:53 AM Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon 03-04-23 22:03:33, Yosry Ahmed wrote: > > wb_over_bg_thresh() calls mem_cgroup_wb_stats() which invokes an rstat > > flush, which can be expensive on large systems. Currently, > > wb_writeback() calls wb_over_bg_thresh() within a lock section, so we > > have to make the rstat flush atomically. On systems with a lot of > > cpus/cgroups, this can cause us to disable irqs for a long time, > > potentially causing problems. > > > > Move the call to wb_over_bg_thresh() outside the lock section in > > preparation to make the rstat flush in mem_cgroup_wb_stats() non-atomic. > > The list_empty(&wb->work_list) should be okay outside the lock section > > of wb->list_lock as it is protected by a separate lock (wb->work_lock), > > and wb_over_bg_thresh() doesn't seem like it is modifying any of the b_* > > lists the wb->list_lock is protecting. Also, the loop seems to be > > already releasing and reacquring the lock, so this refactoring looks > > safe. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@xxxxxxxxxx> > > The patch looks good to me. Nice find. Feel free to add: > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> Thanks for taking a look! > > Honza > > > --- > > fs/fs-writeback.c | 16 +++++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c > > index 195dc23e0d831..012357bc8daa3 100644 > > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c > > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c > > @@ -2021,7 +2021,6 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writeback *wb, > > struct blk_plug plug; > > > > blk_start_plug(&plug); > > - spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); > > for (;;) { > > /* > > * Stop writeback when nr_pages has been consumed > > @@ -2046,6 +2045,9 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writeback *wb, > > if (work->for_background && !wb_over_bg_thresh(wb)) > > break; > > > > + > > + spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); > > + > > /* > > * Kupdate and background works are special and we want to > > * include all inodes that need writing. Livelock avoidance is > > @@ -2075,13 +2077,19 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writeback *wb, > > * mean the overall work is done. So we keep looping as long > > * as made some progress on cleaning pages or inodes. > > */ > > - if (progress) > > + if (progress) { > > + spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); > > continue; > > + } > > + > > /* > > * No more inodes for IO, bail > > */ > > - if (list_empty(&wb->b_more_io)) > > + if (list_empty(&wb->b_more_io)) { > > + spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); > > break; > > + } > > + > > /* > > * Nothing written. Wait for some inode to > > * become available for writeback. Otherwise > > @@ -2093,9 +2101,7 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writeback *wb, > > spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); > > /* This function drops i_lock... */ > > inode_sleep_on_writeback(inode); > > - spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); > > } > > - spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); > > blk_finish_plug(&plug); > > > > return nr_pages - work->nr_pages; > > -- > > 2.40.0.348.gf938b09366-goog > > > -- > Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> > SUSE Labs, CR