Re: [PATCH 4/7] Use vfs __set_page_dirty interface instead of doingit inside filesystem

[Sage Weil]

On Mon, 2 Jul 2012, Sha Zhengju wrote:
> On 06/29/2012 01:21 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Sha Zhengju wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Sha Zhengju<handai.szj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > Following we will treat SetPageDirty and dirty page accounting as an
> > > integrated
> > > operation. Filesystems had better use vfs interface directly to avoid
> > > those details.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Sha Zhengju<handai.szj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   fs/buffer.c                 |    2 +-
> > >   fs/ceph/addr.c              |   20 ++------------------
> > >   include/linux/buffer_head.h |    2 ++
> > >   3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/fs/buffer.c b/fs/buffer.c
> > > index e8d96b8..55522dd 100644
> > > --- a/fs/buffer.c
> > > +++ b/fs/buffer.c
> > > @@ -610,7 +610,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(mark_buffer_dirty_inode);
> > >    * If warn is true, then emit a warning if the page is not uptodate and
> > > has
> > >    * not been truncated.
> > >    */
> > > -static int __set_page_dirty(struct page *page,
> > > +int __set_page_dirty(struct page *page,
> > >   		struct address_space *mapping, int warn)
> > >   {
> > >   	if (unlikely(!mapping))
> > This also needs an EXPORT_SYMBOL(__set_page_dirty) to allow ceph to
> > continue to build as a module.
> > 
> > With that fixed, the ceph bits are a welcome cleanup!
> > 
> > Acked-by: Sage Weil<sage@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Further, I check the path again and may it be reworked as follows to avoid
> undo?
> 
> __set_page_dirty();
> __set_page_dirty();
> ceph operations;                ==>                    if (page->mapping)
> if (page->mapping)                                            ceph operations;
>     ;
> else
>     undo = 1;
> if (undo)
>     xxx;

Yep.  Taking another look at the original code, though, I'm worried that 
one reason the __set_page_dirty() actions were spread out the way they are 
is because we wanted to ensure that the ceph operations were always 
performed when PagePrivate was set.

It looks like invalidatepage won't get called if private isn't set, and 
presumably it handles the truncate race with __set_page_dirty() properly 
(right?).  What about writeback?  Do we need to worry about writepage[s] 
getting called with a NULL page->private?

Thanks!
sage



> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Sha
> 
> > > diff --git a/fs/ceph/addr.c b/fs/ceph/addr.c
> > > index 8b67304..d028fbe 100644
> > > --- a/fs/ceph/addr.c
> > > +++ b/fs/ceph/addr.c
> > > @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
> > >   #include<linux/mm.h>
> > >   #include<linux/pagemap.h>
> > >   #include<linux/writeback.h>	/* generic_writepages */
> > > +#include<linux/buffer_head.h>
> > >   #include<linux/slab.h>
> > >   #include<linux/pagevec.h>
> > >   #include<linux/task_io_accounting_ops.h>
> > > @@ -73,14 +74,8 @@ static int ceph_set_page_dirty(struct page *page)
> > >   	int undo = 0;
> > >   	struct ceph_snap_context *snapc;
> > > 
> > > -	if (unlikely(!mapping))
> > > -		return !TestSetPageDirty(page);
> > > -
> > > -	if (TestSetPageDirty(page)) {
> > > -		dout("%p set_page_dirty %p idx %lu -- already dirty\n",
> > > -		     mapping->host, page, page->index);
> > > +	if (!__set_page_dirty(page, mapping, 1))
> > >   		return 0;
> > > -	}
> > > 
> > >   	inode = mapping->host;
> > >   	ci = ceph_inode(inode);
> > > @@ -107,14 +102,7 @@ static int ceph_set_page_dirty(struct page *page)
> > >   	     snapc, snapc->seq, snapc->num_snaps);
> > >   	spin_unlock(&ci->i_ceph_lock);
> > > 
> > > -	/* now adjust page */
> > > -	spin_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> > >   	if (page->mapping) {	/* Race with truncate? */
> > > -		WARN_ON_ONCE(!PageUptodate(page));
> > > -		account_page_dirtied(page, page->mapping);
> > > -		radix_tree_tag_set(&mapping->page_tree,
> > > -				page_index(page), PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY);
> > > -
> > >   		/*
> > >   		 * Reference snap context in page->private.  Also set
> > >   		 * PagePrivate so that we get invalidatepage callback.
> > > @@ -126,14 +114,10 @@ static int ceph_set_page_dirty(struct page *page)
> > >   		undo = 1;
> > >   	}
> > > 
> > > -	spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> > > -
> > >   	if (undo)
> > >   		/* whoops, we failed to dirty the page */
> > >   		ceph_put_wrbuffer_cap_refs(ci, 1, snapc);
> > > 
> > > -	__mark_inode_dirty(mapping->host, I_DIRTY_PAGES);
> > > -
> > >   	BUG_ON(!PageDirty(page));
> > >   	return 1;
> > >   }
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/buffer_head.h b/include/linux/buffer_head.h
> > > index 458f497..0a331a8 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/buffer_head.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/buffer_head.h
> > > @@ -336,6 +336,8 @@ static inline void lock_buffer(struct buffer_head *bh)
> > >   }
> > > 
> > >   extern int __set_page_dirty_buffers(struct page *page);
> > > +extern int __set_page_dirty(struct page *page,
> > > +		struct address_space *mapping, int warn);
> > > 
> > >   #else /* CONFIG_BLOCK */
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > 1.7.1
> > > 
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel"
> > > in
> > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > > 
> > > 
> 
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/