similar to: [PATCH] Btrfs: make sure the delalloc workers actually flush compressed writes

Greetings all, I see the following issue during snap creation under IO: Transaction commit calls btrfs_start_delalloc_inodes() that locks the delalloc_inodes list, fetches the first inode, unlocks the list, triggers btrfs_alloc_delalloc_work/btrfs_queue_worker for this inode and then locks the list again. Then it checks the head of the list again. In my case, this is always exactly the same

Pre-allocate space for data relocation. This can detect ENOPSC condition caused by fragmentation of free space. Signed-off-by: Yan Zheng <zheng.yan@oracle.com> --- diff -urp 2/fs/btrfs/ctree.h 3/fs/btrfs/ctree.h --- 2/fs/btrfs/ctree.h 2010-04-26 17:28:20.493839748 +0800 +++ 3/fs/btrfs/ctree.h 2010-04-26 17:28:20.498830465 +0800 @@ -2419,6 +2419,9 @@ int btrfs_cont_expand(struct inode *inod

The type of some functions that return only 0 is changed to ''void''. In addition, the check on the return value in the caller of these functions becomes unnecessary. So, these check is removed. Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> --- fs/btrfs/async-thread.c | 17 ++++-------- fs/btrfs/async-thread.h | 4 +- fs/btrfs/compression.c | 14 ++++------

try_to_writeback_inodes_sb_nr returns 1 if writeback is already underway, which is completely fraking useless for us as we need to make sure pages are actually written before we go and check if there are ordered extents. So replace this with an open coding of try_to_writeback_inodes_sb_nr minus the writeback underway check so that we are sure to actually have flushed some dirty pages out and will

On 06/30/2011 09:13 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: > On 06/30/2011 10:12 AM, Proskurin Kirill wrote: >> On 06/29/2011 08:14 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: >>>> Ok - I upgrade to 2.6.39-2 but it is seems to all things get worse. >>>> Now I see [btrfs-transacti]& btrfs-endio-wri] 80-100% all the time and >>>> io performance looks like lower then before.

Hello. I found bugs on error handlings in the functions arround the ext3 file system, which cause inadequate completions of synchronous write I/O operations when disk I/O failures occur. Both 2.4 and 2.6 have this problem. I carried out following experiment: 1. Mount a ext3 file system on a SCSI disk with ordered mode. 2. Open a file on the file system with O_SYNC|O_RDWR|O_TRUNC|O_CREAT

Hi all. I was doing some testing with writing out data to a BTFS filesystem with the compress-force option. With 1 program running, I saw btfs-delalloc taking about 1 CPU worth of time, much as could be expected. I then started up 2 programs at the same time, writing data to the BTRFS volume. btrfs-delalloc still only used 1 CPU worth of time. Is btrfs-delalloc threaded, to where it can use

When testing with max_extents=4k, we enospc out really really early. The reason for this is we really overwhelm the system with our worst case calculation. When we try to flush delalloc, we don''t want everybody to wait around forever, so we wake up the waiters when we''ve done some of the work in hopes that its enough work to get everything they need done. The problem with this

Liu fixed part of this problem and unfortunately I steered him in slightly the wrong direction and so didn''t completely fix the problem. The problem is we limit the size of the delalloc range we are looking for to max bytes and then we try to lock that range. If we fail to lock the pages in that range we will shrink the max bytes to a single page and re loop. However if our first page

Hello all. What we have: SL6 - kernel 2.6.32-131.2.1.el6.x86_64 btrfs on mdadm RAID5 with 8 HDD - 27T partition. I see this at top: 1182 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 100.0 0.0 16:39.73 [btrfs-delalloc-] And LA is grow. What is this and how can I fix it? -- Best regards, Proskurin Kirill -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of

Reserve metadata space for extent tree, checksum tree and root tree Signed-off-by: Yan Zheng <zheng.yan@oracle.com> --- diff -urp 8/fs/btrfs/ctree.h 9/fs/btrfs/ctree.h --- 8/fs/btrfs/ctree.h 2010-04-18 10:26:38.327697818 +0800 +++ 9/fs/btrfs/ctree.h 2010-04-18 10:30:01.883697869 +0800 @@ -682,21 +682,15 @@ struct btrfs_space_info { u64 bytes_reserved; /* total bytes the allocator has

For some asynchronous threads, such as submit worker and cache worker, we limit their thread pool size when mounting. So we also need to do such things when remounting. Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> --- fs/btrfs/super.c | 13 ++++++++----- 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/super.c b/fs/btrfs/super.c index 83d6f9f..a58e834 100644 ---

We only need an async starter if we can''t make a GFP_NOFS allocation in our current path. This is the case for the endio stuff since it happens in IRQ context, but things like the caching thread workers and the delalloc flushers we can easily make this allocation and start threads right away. Also change the worker count for the caching thread pool. Traditionally we limited this to 2

Hi Wei, I ran into the following problem when trying to boot another guest after less than a day of uptime. (the system started 15 guests at boot already which went fine). dom0 is allocated a fixed 1536M. Both host as pv guests run the same kernel, some hvm''s run a slightly older kernel (3.9 f.e.) The are quite some granttable messages in xl dmesg, i also included these and a

This check for a user transaction is a bogus: fsync() with an open user transaction is verboten. If the caller is the same process who started a user transaction, and this is a different file, we will deadlock. If it''s the same file, this check means we won''t deadlock, but the transaction will be prematurely closed out. Any user transaction ioctl users should be careful to

When btrfs_start_transaction() fails, we should call btrfs_std_error() properly for filesystem to readonly. (in this patch, forced readonly framework is used) Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> --- fs/btrfs/file.c | 1 + fs/btrfs/inode.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 11 ++++++++++- fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 4 +++-

Hi, Recently, I made a btrfs to use. And I met slowness problem. Trying to diag it. I found this: 1. dd if=/dev/zero of=test count=1024 bs=1MB This is fast, at about 25MB/s, and reasonable iowait. 2. dd if=/dev/zero of=test count=1 bs=1GB This is pretty slow, at about 1.5MB/s, and 90%+ iowait, constantly. May I know why it works like this? Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the

This patch finally gives us full proper -ENOSPC handling for btrfs. Now whenever you do a btrfs_start_transaction, you must specify the number of items you are planning to add/delete/modify. The worst case number of blocks that could be modified by changing that number of items will be calculated and checked against the amount of free space in the space_info where the root you are modifying

The freeze rwsem is taken by sb_start_intwrite() and dropped during the commit_ or end_transaction(). In the async case, that happens in a worker thread. Tell lockdep the calling thread is releasing ownership of the rwsem and the async thread is picking it up. Josef and I worked out a more complicated solution that made the async commit thread join and potentially get a later transaction, but

Hey Jens, Please in your spare time (if there is such a thing at a conference) pull this branch: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git stable/for-jens-3.10 for your v3.10 branch. Sorry for being so late with this. <blurb> It has the ''feature-max-indirect-segments'' implemented in both backend and frontend. The current problem with the backend and