From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, michel.palleau@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: scrub: update last_physical after scrubing one stripe
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 13:56:00 +1030 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d9154e07333df0c719627364b9035f1fa9cf11de.1709867186.git.wqu@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1709867186.git.wqu@suse.com>
Currently sctx->stat.last_physical only got updated in the following
cases:
- When the last stripe of a non-RAID56 chunk is scrubbed
This implies a pitfall, if the last stripe is at the chunk boundary,
and we finished the scrub of the whole chunk, we won't update
last_physical at all until the next chunk.
- When a P/Q stripe of a RAID56 chunk is scrubbed
This leads makes sctx->stat.last_physical to be not update for a long
time if we're scrubbing a large data chunk (which can go up to 10GiB).
And if scrub is cancelled halfway, we would restart from last_physical,
but that last_physical is only updated to the last finished chunk end,
we would re-scrub the same chunk again.
This can waste a lot of time especially when the chunk is huge.
Fix the problem by properly updating @last_physical after each stripe is
scrubbed.
And since we're here, for the sake of consistency, use spin lock to
protect the update of @last_physical, just like all the remaining
call sites touching sctx->stat.
Reported-by: Michel Palleau <michel.palleau@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/CAMFk-+igFTv2E8svg=cQ6o3e6CrR5QwgQ3Ok9EyRaEvvthpqCQ@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
---
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
index 8a21214eca35..3bccd171be61 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
@@ -1872,6 +1872,8 @@ static int flush_scrub_stripes(struct scrub_ctx *sctx)
stripe = &sctx->stripes[i];
wait_scrub_stripe_io(stripe);
+ sctx->stat.last_physical = stripe->physical +
+ stripe_length(stripe);
scrub_reset_stripe(stripe);
}
out:
@@ -2337,6 +2339,8 @@ static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
stripe_logical += chunk_logical;
ret = scrub_raid56_parity_stripe(sctx, scrub_dev, bg,
map, stripe_logical);
+ sctx->stat.last_physical = min(physical + BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN,
+ physical_end);
if (ret)
goto out;
goto next;
--
2.44.0
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, michel.palleau@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: scrub: update last_physical after scrubing one stripe
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 13:40:31 +1030 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d9154e07333df0c719627364b9035f1fa9cf11de.1709867186.git.wqu@suse.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20240308031031.fd0krgfo9-FarhTsGV73UNRoIHA2kXTwp4o1Iu6dIeY@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1709867186.git.wqu@suse.com>
Currently sctx->stat.last_physical only got updated in the following
cases:
- When the last stripe of a non-RAID56 chunk is scrubbed
This implies a pitfall, if the last stripe is at the chunk boundary,
and we finished the scrub of the whole chunk, we won't update
last_physical at all until the next chunk.
- When a P/Q stripe of a RAID56 chunk is scrubbed
This leads makes sctx->stat.last_physical to be not update for a long
time if we're scrubbing a large data chunk (which can go up to 10GiB).
And if scrub is cancelled halfway, we would restart from last_physical,
but that last_physical is only updated to the last finished chunk end,
we would re-scrub the same chunk again.
This can waste a lot of time especially when the chunk is huge.
Fix the problem by properly updating @last_physical after each stripe is
scrubbed.
And since we're here, for the sake of consistency, use spin lock to
protect the update of @last_physical, just like all the remaining
call sites touching sctx->stat.
Reported-by: Michel Palleau <michel.palleau@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/CAMFk-+igFTv2E8svg=cQ6o3e6CrR5QwgQ3Ok9EyRaEvvthpqCQ@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
---
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
index 8a21214eca35..3bccd171be61 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
@@ -1872,6 +1872,8 @@ static int flush_scrub_stripes(struct scrub_ctx *sctx)
stripe = &sctx->stripes[i];
wait_scrub_stripe_io(stripe);
+ sctx->stat.last_physical = stripe->physical +
+ stripe_length(stripe);
scrub_reset_stripe(stripe);
}
out:
@@ -2337,6 +2339,8 @@ static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
stripe_logical += chunk_logical;
ret = scrub_raid56_parity_stripe(sctx, scrub_dev, bg,
map, stripe_logical);
+ sctx->stat.last_physical = min(physical + BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN,
+ physical_end);
if (ret)
goto out;
goto next;
--
2.44.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-08 4:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-08 3:10 [PATCH 0/2] btrfs: scrub: update last_physical more frequently Qu Wenruo
2024-03-08 3:25 ` Qu Wenruo
2024-03-08 3:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] btrfs: extract the stripe length calculation into a helper Qu Wenruo
2024-03-08 3:10 ` Qu Wenruo
2024-03-08 11:37 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2024-03-08 3:26 ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2024-03-08 3:10 ` [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: scrub: update last_physical after scrubing one stripe Qu Wenruo
2024-04-07 21:36 ` [PATCH 0/2] btrfs: scrub: update last_physical more frequently Qu Wenruo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d9154e07333df0c719627364b9035f1fa9cf11de.1709867186.git.wqu@suse.com \
--to=wqu@suse.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michel.palleau@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).