xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH block/for-linus] writeback: fix syncing of I_DIRTY_TIME inode

To: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH block/for-linus] writeback: fix syncing of I_DIRTY_TIME inodes
From: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:47:18 -0700
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>, Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxx, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kernel-team@xxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=GKU2aMngVCOF4Z0LzYu09QOsn8reUr53eqaboOLG59Y=; b=pu9CRUit/j3tot9/WGayV7GNQbVrreGGFboPDTdr9fuPrF353rpfA+o6xD8cyfh7TZ raNi5jn/49wEE9kQjWd64JgaGCkPIb1sMLlSu6AKXPRVOST1flhbW0uKYVdcksxoyDxX MJErE3+SHSKGddwQyQSMlYR3AqoRsIymdVB8U+a7B5NREz3P91q6+cyAso7kt4rfofWQ 3u/OQ/TZ9/GE+DlDOgB1yUiUdiLTlQIuDCDBsLPgBCYBRiudlmdWeyrcyLbj6x08ErsX GypB4nBGm6noxVgOqBvtb001VWrSXHVv9uIUDilpkASHsRkhL5ry69dRhvn8YMP0zaPY 9CsA==
In-reply-to: <20150818091603.GA12317@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20150812101204.GE17933@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150813004435.GN3902@dastard> <20150813224415.GG4496@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150814111408.GB8710@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150817200254.GG21075@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150818091603.GA12317@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:16:03AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 17-08-15 16:02:54, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, Jan.
> > 
> > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 01:14:09PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > So the patch looks good to me. But the fact that is fixes Eryu's problem
> > > means there is something fishy going on. Either inodes get wrongly 
> > > attached
> > 
> > Seriously, it shouldn't affect size syncing or xfs but then again my
> > understanding of xfs is severely limited.
> 
> Well, i_size == 0 in XFS usually means that writeback didn't get to
> flushing delay allocated pages - inode size on disk gets increased only
> after the pages are written out in ->end_io callback. So at least this part
> makes some sense to me.

Hmm... the only possibility I can think of is tot_write_bandwidth
being zero when it shouldn't be.  I've been staring at the code for a
while now but nothing rings a bell.  Time for another debug patch, I
guess.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

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