Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] ocfs2: avoid getting dlm lock of the target directory multiple times during reflink process

From: Wengang Wang
Date: Wed Sep 08 2021 - 12:00:42 EST

Next message: David Laight: "RE: [tip: timers/urgent] time: Handle negative seconds correctly in timespec64_to_ns()"
Previous message: Pawan Gupta: "Re: [PATCH] x86/tsx: clear RTM and HLE when MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL is not supported"
In reply to: Gang He: "Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] ocfs2: avoid getting dlm lock of the target directory multiple times during reflink process"
Next in thread: Gang He: "Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] ocfs2: avoid getting dlm lock of the target directory multiple times during reflink process"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> On Sep 7, 2021, at 11:06 PM, Gang He <ghe@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2021/9/7 23:57, Wengang Wang wrote:
>> Hi Gang,
>> Sure, I will look into the problem you are trying to address. Any bug fix and performance improvement is welcomed!
>> Well, can you please provide the analysis on the tcpdumps between the (two) nodes that covers the reflink operation with/without your patch to show how you saved dlm locking ping-pongs?
> The code change will hold the reflink destination dir inode dlm lock, release it until the whole reflink process is completed.
> The current code will hold/release this dlm lock three times during the reflink process. If there are some concurrently reflink operation to that directory from other nodes, the ping-pong effect is that directory inode related data will be synchronized(multiple times) to the disk when inode dlm lock is downconverted during one reflink operation.
>

I think the above can be a good summary, but not details or the locking ping-pong procedure. I need the details to understand the situation. For details, Which locks are involved, what are the locking types, which nodes are involved.

Say like this (just for an example, not related to the problem here):

Node 1 Node 2 Node 3
——————————— ——————————— ————————————————————
dir1 meta lock EX
orphandir1 lock EX
dir1 meta lock EX
orphadir2 lock EX

dir1 meta lock EX
orphadir3 lock EX
dir1 meta block EX (again)
………………..

> According to my test, running the reflink command to clone a file to the same directory repeatedly from three nodes, the code change can shorten the previous half of the time.
>

I am not sure if above is a typical use case.
What else cases did you test? Did it help in case only one node do the reflink?
What if there are concurrent file creating/removing operations going on under the target directory when the reflink is going on?

I think when you are trying to make a performance improvement, you should provide the performance data for different test cases, like this:

————————————————————————————————
Test case desc | orig performance | performance after patched |
————————————————————————————————
test case1 (details) | perf data | perf data |
———————————————————————————————-
test case2 (details) | perf data | perf data |
———————————————————————————————
……

thanks,
wengang

> Thanks
> Gang
>
>> And what cases did you test to get better performance?
>> thanks,
>> wengang
>>> On Aug 30, 2021, at 11:25 PM, Gang He <ghe@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Joseph and Wengang,
>>>
>>> When you have time, please help review this patch.
>>> About the deadlock problem which was caused by ocfs2_downconvert_lock
>>> failure, we have the fix patch, it is very key.
>>> But I feel this patch is still useful as a optimization patch, the user
>>> case is to reflink the files to the same directory concurrently, our
>>> users usually backup the files(via reflink) from the cluster nodes
>>> concurrently(via crontab) every day/hour.
>>> The current design, during the reflink process, the node will
>>> acquire/release dlm lock of the target directory multiple times,
>>> this is very inefficient in concurrently reflink.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Gang
>>>
>>> On 2021/8/26 15:59, Gang He wrote:
>>>> During the reflink process, we should acquire the target directory
>>>> inode dlm lock at the beginning, and hold this dlm lock until end
>>>> of the function.
>>>> With this patch, we avoid dlm lock ping-pong effect when clone
>>>> files to the same directory simultaneously from multiple nodes.
>>>> There is a typical user scenario, users regularly back up files
>>>> to a specified directory through the reflink feature from the
>>>> multiple nodes.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gang He <ghe@xxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> fs/ocfs2/namei.c | 32 +++++++++++++-------------------
>>>> fs/ocfs2/namei.h | 2 ++
>>>> fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c | 15 +++++++++++----
>>>> fs/ocfs2/xattr.c | 12 +-----------
>>>> fs/ocfs2/xattr.h | 1 +
>>>> 5 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/namei.c b/fs/ocfs2/namei.c
>>>> index 2c46ff6ba4ea..f8bbb22cc60b 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/namei.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/namei.c
>>>> @@ -2489,6 +2489,7 @@ static int ocfs2_prep_new_orphaned_file(struct inode *dir,
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> int ocfs2_create_inode_in_orphan(struct inode *dir,
>>>> + struct buffer_head **dir_bh,
>>>> int mode,
>>>> struct inode **new_inode)
>>>> {
>>>> @@ -2597,13 +2598,16 @@ int ocfs2_create_inode_in_orphan(struct inode *dir,
>>>>
>>>> brelse(new_di_bh);
>>>>
>>>> - if (!status)
>>>> - *new_inode = inode;
>>>> -
>>>> ocfs2_free_dir_lookup_result(&orphan_insert);
>>>>
>>>> - ocfs2_inode_unlock(dir, 1);
>>>> - brelse(parent_di_bh);
>>>> + if (!status) {
>>>> + *new_inode = inode;
>>>> + *dir_bh = parent_di_bh;
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + ocfs2_inode_unlock(dir, 1);
>>>> + brelse(parent_di_bh);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> return status;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> @@ -2760,11 +2764,11 @@ int ocfs2_del_inode_from_orphan(struct ocfs2_super *osb,
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> int ocfs2_mv_orphaned_inode_to_new(struct inode *dir,
>>>> + struct buffer_head *dir_bh,
>>>> struct inode *inode,
>>>> struct dentry *dentry)
>>>> {
>>>> int status = 0;
>>>> - struct buffer_head *parent_di_bh = NULL;
>>>> handle_t *handle = NULL;
>>>> struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(dir->i_sb);
>>>> struct ocfs2_dinode *dir_di, *di;
>>>> @@ -2778,14 +2782,7 @@ int ocfs2_mv_orphaned_inode_to_new(struct inode *dir,
>>>> (unsigned long long)OCFS2_I(dir)->ip_blkno,
>>>> (unsigned long long)OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_blkno);
>>>>
>>>> - status = ocfs2_inode_lock(dir, &parent_di_bh, 1);
>>>> - if (status < 0) {
>>>> - if (status != -ENOENT)
>>>> - mlog_errno(status);
>>>> - return status;
>>>> - }
>>>> -
>>>> - dir_di = (struct ocfs2_dinode *) parent_di_bh->b_data;
>>>> + dir_di = (struct ocfs2_dinode *) dir_bh->b_data;
>>>> if (!dir_di->i_links_count) {
>>>> /* can't make a file in a deleted directory. */
>>>> status = -ENOENT;
>>>> @@ -2798,7 +2795,7 @@ int ocfs2_mv_orphaned_inode_to_new(struct inode *dir,
>>>> goto leave;
>>>>
>>>> /* get a spot inside the dir. */
>>>> - status = ocfs2_prepare_dir_for_insert(osb, dir, parent_di_bh,
>>>> + status = ocfs2_prepare_dir_for_insert(osb, dir, dir_bh,
>>>> dentry->d_name.name,
>>>> dentry->d_name.len, &lookup);
>>>> if (status < 0) {
>>>> @@ -2862,7 +2859,7 @@ int ocfs2_mv_orphaned_inode_to_new(struct inode *dir,
>>>> ocfs2_journal_dirty(handle, di_bh);
>>>>
>>>> status = ocfs2_add_entry(handle, dentry, inode,
>>>> - OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_blkno, parent_di_bh,
>>>> + OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_blkno, dir_bh,
>>>> &lookup);
>>>> if (status < 0) {
>>>> mlog_errno(status);
>>>> @@ -2886,10 +2883,7 @@ int ocfs2_mv_orphaned_inode_to_new(struct inode *dir,
>>>> iput(orphan_dir_inode);
>>>> leave:
>>>>
>>>> - ocfs2_inode_unlock(dir, 1);
>>>> -
>>>> brelse(di_bh);
>>>> - brelse(parent_di_bh);
>>>> brelse(orphan_dir_bh);
>>>>
>>>> ocfs2_free_dir_lookup_result(&lookup);
>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/namei.h b/fs/ocfs2/namei.h
>>>> index 9cc891eb874e..03a2c526e2c1 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/namei.h
>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/namei.h
>>>> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ int ocfs2_orphan_del(struct ocfs2_super *osb,
>>>> struct buffer_head *orphan_dir_bh,
>>>> bool dio);
>>>> int ocfs2_create_inode_in_orphan(struct inode *dir,
>>>> + struct buffer_head **dir_bh,
>>>> int mode,
>>>> struct inode **new_inode);
>>>> int ocfs2_add_inode_to_orphan(struct ocfs2_super *osb,
>>>> @@ -32,6 +33,7 @@ int ocfs2_del_inode_from_orphan(struct ocfs2_super *osb,
>>>> struct inode *inode, struct buffer_head *di_bh,
>>>> int update_isize, loff_t end);
>>>> int ocfs2_mv_orphaned_inode_to_new(struct inode *dir,
>>>> + struct buffer_head *dir_bh,
>>>> struct inode *new_inode,
>>>> struct dentry *new_dentry);
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c b/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c
>>>> index 7f6355cbb587..a9a0c7c37e8e 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c
>>>> @@ -4250,7 +4250,7 @@ static int ocfs2_reflink(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir,
>>>> {
>>>> int error, had_lock;
>>>> struct inode *inode = d_inode(old_dentry);
>>>> - struct buffer_head *old_bh = NULL;
>>>> + struct buffer_head *old_bh = NULL, *dir_bh = NULL;
>>>> struct inode *new_orphan_inode = NULL;
>>>> struct ocfs2_lock_holder oh;
>>>>
>>>> @@ -4258,7 +4258,7 @@ static int ocfs2_reflink(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir,
>>>> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - error = ocfs2_create_inode_in_orphan(dir, inode->i_mode,
>>>> + error = ocfs2_create_inode_in_orphan(dir, &dir_bh, inode->i_mode,
>>>> &new_orphan_inode);
>>>> if (error) {
>>>> mlog_errno(error);
>>>> @@ -4304,13 +4304,15 @@ static int ocfs2_reflink(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir,
>>>>
>>>> /* If the security isn't preserved, we need to re-initialize them. */
>>>> if (!preserve) {
>>>> - error = ocfs2_init_security_and_acl(dir, new_orphan_inode,
>>>> + error = ocfs2_init_security_and_acl(dir, dir_bh,
>>>> + new_orphan_inode,
>>>> &new_dentry->d_name);
>>>> if (error)
>>>> mlog_errno(error);
>>>> }
>>>> if (!error) {
>>>> - error = ocfs2_mv_orphaned_inode_to_new(dir, new_orphan_inode,
>>>> + error = ocfs2_mv_orphaned_inode_to_new(dir, dir_bh,
>>>> + new_orphan_inode,
>>>> new_dentry);
>>>> if (error)
>>>> mlog_errno(error);
>>>> @@ -4328,6 +4330,11 @@ static int ocfs2_reflink(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir,
>>>> iput(new_orphan_inode);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> + if (dir_bh) {
>>>> + ocfs2_inode_unlock(dir, 1);
>>>> + brelse(dir_bh);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> return error;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/xattr.c b/fs/ocfs2/xattr.c
>>>> index dd784eb0cd7c..3f23e3a5018c 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/xattr.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/xattr.c
>>>> @@ -7203,16 +7203,13 @@ int ocfs2_reflink_xattrs(struct inode *old_inode,
>>>> /*
>>>> * Initialize security and acl for a already created inode.
>>>> * Used for reflink a non-preserve-security file.
>>>> - *
>>>> - * It uses common api like ocfs2_xattr_set, so the caller
>>>> - * must not hold any lock expect i_mutex.
>>>> */
>>>> int ocfs2_init_security_and_acl(struct inode *dir,
>>>> + struct buffer_head *dir_bh,
>>>> struct inode *inode,
>>>> const struct qstr *qstr)
>>>> {
>>>> int ret = 0;
>>>> - struct buffer_head *dir_bh = NULL;
>>>>
>>>> ret = ocfs2_init_security_get(inode, dir, qstr, NULL);
>>>> if (ret) {
>>>> @@ -7220,17 +7217,10 @@ int ocfs2_init_security_and_acl(struct inode *dir,
>>>> goto leave;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> - ret = ocfs2_inode_lock(dir, &dir_bh, 0);
>>>> - if (ret) {
>>>> - mlog_errno(ret);
>>>> - goto leave;
>>>> - }
>>>> ret = ocfs2_init_acl(NULL, inode, dir, NULL, dir_bh, NULL, NULL);
>>>> if (ret)
>>>> mlog_errno(ret);
>>>>
>>>> - ocfs2_inode_unlock(dir, 0);
>>>> - brelse(dir_bh);
>>>> leave:
>>>> return ret;
>>>> }
>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/xattr.h b/fs/ocfs2/xattr.h
>>>> index 00308b57f64f..b27fd8ba0019 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/xattr.h
>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/xattr.h
>>>> @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ int ocfs2_reflink_xattrs(struct inode *old_inode,
>>>> struct buffer_head *new_bh,
>>>> bool preserve_security);
>>>> int ocfs2_init_security_and_acl(struct inode *dir,
>>>> + struct buffer_head *dir_bh,
>>>> struct inode *inode,
>>>> const struct qstr *qstr);
>>>> #endif /* OCFS2_XATTR_H */
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
>>> Ocfs2-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
>

Next message: David Laight: "RE: [tip: timers/urgent] time: Handle negative seconds correctly in timespec64_to_ns()"
Previous message: Pawan Gupta: "Re: [PATCH] x86/tsx: clear RTM and HLE when MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL is not supported"
In reply to: Gang He: "Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] ocfs2: avoid getting dlm lock of the target directory multiple times during reflink process"
Next in thread: Gang He: "Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] ocfs2: avoid getting dlm lock of the target directory multiple times during reflink process"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]