On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 10:18:14AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 07:09:36AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 08:43:12AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Here's a v5 RFC of the automatic item relogging experiment. Firstly, > > > note that this is still a POC and experimental code with various quirks. > > > > Heh, funny, I was going to ask you if you might have time next week to > > review the latest iteration of the btree bulk loading series so that I > > could get closer to merging the rest of online repair and/or refactoring > > offline repair. I'll take a closer look at this after I read through > > everything else that came in overnight. > > > > Sure.. I can put that next on the list. Is the latest release pending a > post or already posted? Being out for over a month (effectively closer > to two when considering proximity to the holidays) caused me to pretty > much clear everything in my mailbox for obvious reasons. ;) As a result, > anything that might have been on my radar prior to that timeframe has > most likely dropped completely off it. :P Pending. The patches themselves haven't changed much since the end of October when I fixed all the things we talked about at the beginning of that month, but you might as well wait for a new version rebased off 5.6. :) (If you get really really bored and/or I get bogged down in something else, the NYE patchbomb version is pretty close to what's in my tree now...) --D > Brian > > > --D > > > > > Some are documented in the code, others might not be (such as abusing > > > the AIL lock, etc.). The primary purpose of this series is still to > > > express and review a fundamental design. Based on discussion on the last > > > version, there is specific focus towards addressing log reservation and > > > pre-item locking deadlock vectors. While the code is still quite hacky, > > > I believe this design addresses both of those fundamental issues. > > > Further details on the design and approach are documented in the > > > individual commit logs. > > > > > > In addition, the final few patches introduce buffer relogging capability > > > and test infrastructure, which currently has no use case other than to > > > demonstrate development flexibility and the ability to support arbitrary > > > log items in the future, if ever desired. If this approach is taken > > > forward, the current use cases are still centered around intent items > > > such as the quotaoff use case and extent freeing use case defined by > > > online repair of free space trees. > > > > > > On somewhat of a tangent, another intent oriented use case idea crossed > > > my mind recently related to the long standing writeback stale data > > > exposure problem (i.e. if we crash after a delalloc extent is converted > > > but before writeback fully completes on the extent). The obvious > > > approach of using unwritten extents has been rebuffed due to performance > > > concerns over extent conversion. I wonder if we had the ability to log a > > > "writeback pending" intent on some reasonable level of granularity (i.e. > > > something between a block and extent), whether we could use that to > > > allow log recovery to zero (or convert) such extents in the event of a > > > crash. This is a whole separate design discussion, however, as it > > > involves tracking outstanding writeback, etc. In this context it simply > > > serves as a prospective use case for relogging, as such intents would > > > otherwise risk similar log subsystem deadlocks as the quotaoff use case. > > > > > > Thoughts, reviews, flames appreciated. > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > rfcv5: > > > - More fleshed out design to prevent log reservation deadlock and > > > locking problems. > > > - Split out core patches between pre-reservation management, relog item > > > state management and relog mechanism. > > > - Added experimental buffer relogging capability. > > > rfcv4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191205175037.52529-1-bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > - AIL based approach. > > > rfcv3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191125185523.47556-1-bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > - CIL based approach. > > > rfcv2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191122181927.32870-1-bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > - Different approach based on workqueue and transaction rolling. > > > rfc: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191024172850.7698-1-bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > > > Brian Foster (9): > > > xfs: set t_task at wait time instead of alloc time > > > xfs: introduce ->tr_relog transaction > > > xfs: automatic relogging reservation management > > > xfs: automatic relogging item management > > > xfs: automatic log item relog mechanism > > > xfs: automatically relog the quotaoff start intent > > > xfs: buffer relogging support prototype > > > xfs: create an error tag for random relog reservation > > > xfs: relog random buffers based on errortag > > > > > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_errortag.h | 4 +- > > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_shared.h | 1 + > > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_resv.c | 24 +++- > > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_resv.h | 1 + > > > fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c | 5 + > > > fs/xfs/xfs_dquot_item.c | 7 ++ > > > fs/xfs/xfs_error.c | 3 + > > > fs/xfs/xfs_log.c | 2 +- > > > fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c | 12 +- > > > fs/xfs/xfs_trace.h | 3 + > > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c | 79 +++++++++++- > > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans.h | 13 +- > > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans_ail.c | 216 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans_buf.c | 35 ++++++ > > > fs/xfs/xfs_trans_priv.h | 6 + > > > 15 files changed, 399 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > > > > > -- > > > 2.21.1 > > > > > >
