[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Cleancache support in XFS

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Cleancache support in XFS
From: James Dingwall <james.dingwall@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:53:08 +0000
Accept-language: en-GB, en-US
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>, "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20130723082700.GK19986@dastard>
References: <51810CED.4080003@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20130501162044.GN29359@xxxxxxx> <20130501223022.GQ10481@dastard> <518222D3.3080109@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20130522192834.GD10617@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <519F1708.10603@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20130607170826.GA6925@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <51E8E834.6080509@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20130722154812.GC30300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <51EE2F54.80701@xxxxxxxxxxx>,<20130723082700.GK19986@dastard>
Thread-topic: Cleancache support in XFS
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 23 July 2013 09:27
To: James Dingwall
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk; Ben Myers; xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Cleancache support in XFS

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:23:00AM +0100, James Dingwall wrote:
> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 08:18:12AM +0100, James Dingwall wrote:
> >>Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >>>On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 08:30:16AM +0100, James Dingwall wrote:
> >>>>Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >>>>>On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 09:24:51AM +0100, James Dingwall wrote:
> >>>>>>Dave Chinner wrote:
> >>>>>>>On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 11:20:44AM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
> >>>>>>>>Hi James,
> >>>>>Hey folks,
> >>>>>I am walking through my vacation-emails-mbox.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 01:39:09PM +0100, James Dingwall wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>In reference to: 
> >>>>>>>>>http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-05/msg00046.html
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>$ grep -r cleancache fs/xfs
> >>>>>>>>>on the 3.9 kernel source suggests that no patch was submitted to
> >>>>>>>>>enable cleancache for the XFS filesystem.  Since it was suggested
> >>>>>>>>>that this could be a one liner I've had a go and my first effort is
> >>>>>>>>>inline below.  While this seems to compile OK I have no experience
> >>>>>>>>>in filesystems so I would appreciate it if anyone can point out that
> >>>>>>>>>it is obviously wrong and likely to eat my data before I try booting
> >>>>>>>>>the kernel.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>If it seems a reasonable attempt what would be the best way to check
> >>>>>>>>>that it isn't doing nasty things?
> >>>>>>>>Hrm.. Looks like there is a doc in Documentation/vm/cleancache.txt 
> >>>>>>>>which
> >>>>>>>>includes a list of attributes the filesystem needs to have to work 
> >>>>>>>>properly
> >>>>>>>>with cleancache.
> >>>>>>>So, those points are:
> >>>>>>I had started to look at these too but I feel very out of my depth!
> >>>>>>I had similar conclusions to what Dave wrote but I don't think my
> >>>>>>thoughts should carry very much (any) weight.  Anyway I gambled and
> >>>>>>booted my xen domU with this patch and so far so good...  xen top
> >>>>>>shows that tmem is now being used where previously it wasn't.  I'll
> >>>>>>try running the xfstests at the weekend after a couple more days up
> >>>>>>time to see what happens.
> >>>>>And how did it go?
> >>>>I am running the patch I created on 3.9.3 on half of my xen guests
> >>>>now and have not noticed any stability or filesystem problems.  xl
> >>>>top with 'T' shows that the guests running with it are using
> >>>>ephemeral pages were those without do not.  I did do some runs with
> >>>>xfstests which had some failures but they were present with and
> >>>>without the patch.  The best I can really offer is that it works for
> >>>>me, ymmv.  The patch is available as commit
> >>>>c725011c4fc5d47e12d131f61bd91a58a40036b5 in
> >>>>https://github.com/JKDingwall/linux.git xfs-enable-cleancache or in
> >>>>the first message of this thread.
> >>>Hey James,
> >>>
> >>>I've run this patch on my local tree and it looks to work right. I am
> >>>saying "looks" as I am hitting some other issue that I believe are
> >>>unralted to the patch - but I need to figure them out before I can
> >>>comfortably say: "Yes, this looks right and works for me as well."
> >>>
> >>>Stay tuned.
> >>Just to add that I have also had no observable problems running this
> >>patch on 3.10.0 or 3.10.1.
> >Yup. And I tested it as well. In other words if you would like to add
> >Acked-by from me that would be super. Thanks!
> My patch is now available in https://github.com/JKDingwall/linux.git
> xfs-enable-cleancache as commit id
> 6d50663e4ec88b7e1fd872b12ac310b1f4bb38c6.  I have rebased it on 3.10
> with KRW's Acked-by and my Signed-off-by in the commit message.  Is
> it reasonable for this to be considered for 3.12 or would further
> testing be required?

I think that's sufficient. Send it to the list ;)

I hope that the inline version below will apply cleanly and the white space 
hasn't been corrupted.


commit 6d50663e4ec88b7e1fd872b12ac310b1f4bb38c6
Author: James Dingwall <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:   Wed May 1 17:32:26 2013 +0100

    fs/xfs: add cleancache support to the filesystem
    Enabling cleancache for xfs will allow files cached from an xfs filesystem 
to be stored in any available tmem pools.  This has been tested with Xen 4.2.2 
where xl top shows usage of the
    tmem pools where this is enabled in the guest's kernel.
    Signed-off-by: James Dingwall <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
    Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
index 3033ba5..bcc1668 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
@@ -61,6 +61,7 @@
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
 #include <linux/freezer.h>
 #include <linux/parser.h>
+#include <linux/cleancache.h>
 static const struct super_operations xfs_super_operations;
 static kmem_zone_t *xfs_ioend_zone;
@@ -1500,6 +1501,8 @@ xfs_fs_fill_super(
                goto out_unmount;
+       cleancache_init_fs(sb);
        return 0;

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>