On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:48:59AM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 01:24:03PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Wed 26-05-21 15:25:57, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > > Asynchronously try to release dying cgwbs by switching clean attached
> > > inodes to the bdi's wb. It helps to get rid of per-cgroup writeback
> > > structures themselves and of pinned memory and block cgroups, which
> > > are way larger structures (mostly due to large per-cpu statistics
> > > data). It helps to prevent memory waste and different scalability
> > > problems caused by large piles of dying cgroups.
> > >
> > > A cgwb cleanup operation can fail due to different reasons (e.g. the
> > > cgwb has in-glight/pending io, an attached inode is locked or isn't
> > > clean, etc). In this case the next scheduled cleanup will make a new
> > > attempt. An attempt is made each time a new cgwb is offlined (in other
> > > words a memcg and/or a blkcg is deleted by a user). In the future an
> > > additional attempt scheduled by a timer can be implemented.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > fs/fs-writeback.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++
> > > include/linux/backing-dev-defs.h | 1 +
> > > include/linux/writeback.h | 1 +
> > > mm/backing-dev.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > 4 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > > index 631ef6366293..8fbcd50844f0 100644
> > > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > > @@ -577,6 +577,41 @@ static void inode_switch_wbs(struct inode *inode, int new_wb_id)
> > > kfree(isw);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +/**
> > > + * cleanup_offline_wb - detach associated clean inodes
> > > + * @wb: target wb
> > > + *
> > > + * Switch the inode->i_wb pointer of the attached inodes to the bdi's wb and
> > > + * drop the corresponding per-cgroup wb's reference. Skip inodes which are
> > > + * dirty, freeing, in the active writeback process or are in any way busy.
> >
> > I think the comment doesn't match the function anymore.
> >
> > > + */
> > > +void cleanup_offline_wb(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
> > > +{
> > > + struct inode *inode, *tmp;
> > > +
> > > + spin_lock(&wb->list_lock);
> > > +restart:
> > > + list_for_each_entry_safe(inode, tmp, &wb->b_attached, i_io_list) {
> > > + if (!spin_trylock(&inode->i_lock))
> > > + continue;
> > > + xa_lock_irq(&inode->i_mapping->i_pages);
> > > + if ((inode->i_state & I_REFERENCED) != I_REFERENCED) {
> >
> > Why the I_REFERENCED check here? That's just inode aging bit and I have
> > hard time seeing how it would relate to whether inode should switch wbs...
>
> What I tried to say (and failed :) ) was that I_REFERENCED is the only accepted
> flag here. So there must be
> if ((inode->i_state | I_REFERENCED) != I_REFERENCED)
Sorry, I'm wrong. Must be:
if ((inode->i_state | I_REFERENCED) == I_REFERENCED) {
...
}
or even simpler:
if (!(inode->i_state & ~I_REFERENCED)) {
...
}
