kernel/linux.git/fs/btrfs/locking.h, branch v6.12.80

btrfs: cleanup recursive include of the same header

2024-07-11T13:33:22+00:00

We have several headers that are including themselves, triggering clangd warnings. Such includes are caused by commit 602035d7fecf ("btrfs: add forward declarations and headers, part 2"). Just remove such unnecessary include. Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: locking: rename __btrfs_tree_lock() and __btrfs_tree_read_lock()

2024-05-07T19:31:00+00:00

The __btrfs_tree_lock() and __btrfs_tree_read_lock() are using a naming with a double underscore prefix, which is specially not proper for exported functions. Remove the double underscore prefix from their name and add the "_nested" suffix. Reviewed-by: Anand Jain Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: locking: inline btrfs_tree_lock() and btrfs_tree_read_lock()

2024-05-07T19:31:00+00:00

The functions btrfs_tree_lock() and btrfs_tree_read_lock() are very trivial so that can be made inline and avoid call overhead, as they are very often called inside critical sections (when searching a btree for example, attempting to lock a child node/leaf while holding a lock on the parent). So make them static inline, which even reduces the size of the btrfs module a little bit. Before this change: $ size fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko text data bss dec hex filename 1718786 156276 16920 1891982 1cde8e fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko After this change: $ size fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko text data bss dec hex filename 1718650 156260 16920 1891830 1cddf6 fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko Running fs_mark also showed a tiny improvement with this script: $ cat test.sh #!/bin/bash DEV=/dev/nullb0 MNT=/mnt/nullb0 FILES=100000 THREADS=$(nproc --all) echo "performance" | \ tee /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor umount $DEV &> /dev/null mkfs.btrfs -f $DEV mount $DEV $MNT OPTS="-S 0 -L 5 -n $FILES -s 0 -t $THREADS -k" for ((i = 1; i <= $THREADS; i++)); do OPTS="$OPTS -d $MNT/d$i" done fs_mark $OPTS umount $MNT Before this change: FSUse% Count Size Files/sec App Overhead 10 1200000 0 180894.0 10705410 16 2400000 0 228211.4 10765738 23 3600000 0 215969.6 11011072 30 4800000 0 199077.1 11145587 46 6000000 0 176624.1 11658470 After this change: FSUse% Count Size Files/sec App Overhead 10 1200000 0 185312.3 10708377 16 2400000 0 229320.4 10858013 23 3600000 0 217958.7 11006167 30 4800000 0 205122.9 11112899 46 6000000 0 178039.1 11438852 Reviewed-by: Anand Jain Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: add forward declarations and headers, part 2

2024-03-04T15:24:49+00:00

Do a cleanup in more headers: - add forward declarations for types referenced by pointers - add includes when types need them This fixes potential compilation problems if the headers are reordered or the missing includes are not provided indirectly. Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: do not block starts waiting on previous transaction commit

2023-09-08T12:10:49+00:00

Internally I got a report of very long stalls on normal operations like creating a new file when auto relocation was running. The reporter used the 'bpf offcputime' tracer to show that we would get stuck in start_transaction for 5 to 30 seconds, and were always being woken up by the transaction commit. Using my timing-everything script, which times how long a function takes and what percentage of that total time is taken up by its children, I saw several traces like this 1083 took 32812902424 ns 29929002926 ns 91.2110% wait_for_commit_duration 25568 ns 7.7920e-05% commit_fs_roots_duration 1007751 ns 0.00307% commit_cowonly_roots_duration 446855602 ns 1.36182% btrfs_run_delayed_refs_duration 271980 ns 0.00082% btrfs_run_delayed_items_duration 2008 ns 6.1195e-06% btrfs_apply_pending_changes_duration 9656 ns 2.9427e-05% switch_commit_roots_duration 1598 ns 4.8700e-06% btrfs_commit_device_sizes_duration 4314 ns 1.3147e-05% btrfs_free_log_root_tree_duration Here I was only tracing functions that happen where we are between START_COMMIT and UNBLOCKED in order to see what would be keeping us blocked for so long. The wait_for_commit() we do is where we wait for a previous transaction that hasn't completed it's commit. This can include all of the unpin work and other cleanups, which tends to be the longest part of our transaction commit. There is no reason we should be blocking new things from entering the transaction at this point, it just adds to random latency spikes for no reason. Fix this by adding a PREP stage. This allows us to properly deal with multiple committers coming in at the same time, we retain the behavior that the winner waits on the previous transaction and the losers all wait for this transaction commit to occur. Nothing else is blocked during the PREP stage, and then once the wait is complete we switch to COMMIT_START and all of the same behavior as before is maintained. Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: locking: use atomic for DREW lock writers

2023-04-17T16:01:17+00:00

The DREW lock uses percpu variable to track lock counters and for that it needs to allocate the structure. In btrfs_read_tree_root() or btrfs_init_fs_root() this may add another error case or requires the NOFS scope protection. One way is to preallocate the structure as was suggested in https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/20221214021125.28289-1-robbieko@synology.com/ We may avoid the allocation altogether if we don't use the percpu variables but an atomic for the writer counter. This should not make any difference, the DREW lock is used for truncate and NOCOW writes along with other IO operations. The percpu counter for writers has been there since the original commit 8257b2dc3c1a1057 "Btrfs: introduce btrfs_{start, end}_nocow_write() for each subvolume". The reason could be to avoid hammering the same cacheline from all the readers but then the writers do that anyway. Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: move the lockdep helpers into locking.h

2022-12-05T17:00:44+00:00

These more naturally fit in with the locking related code, and they're all defines so they can easily go anywhere, move them out of ctree.h into locking.h Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: implement a nowait option for tree searches

2022-09-26T10:46:42+00:00

For NOWAIT IOCBs we'll need a way to tell search to not wait on locks or anything. Accomplish this by adding a path->nowait flag that will use trylocks and skip reading of metadata, returning -EAGAIN in either of these cases. For now we only need this for reads, so only the read side is handled. Add an ASSERT() to catch anybody trying to use this for writes so they know they'll have to implement the write side. Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Signed-off-by: Stefan Roesch Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

2022-08-17T14:19:12+00:00

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.19.0-rc8+ #775 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ btrfs/752500 is trying to acquire lock: ffff97e1875a97b8 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110 but task is already holding lock: ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #2 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}: down_write_nested+0x41/0x80 __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110 btrfs_init_new_buffer+0x7d/0x2c0 btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x120/0x3b0 __btrfs_cow_block+0x136/0x600 btrfs_cow_block+0x10b/0x230 btrfs_search_slot+0x53b/0xb70 btrfs_lookup_inode+0x2a/0xa0 __btrfs_update_delayed_inode+0x5f/0x280 btrfs_async_run_delayed_root+0x24c/0x290 btrfs_work_helper+0xf2/0x3e0 process_one_work+0x271/0x590 worker_thread+0x52/0x3b0 kthread+0xf0/0x120 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 -> #1 (btrfs-tree-01){++++}-{3:3}: down_write_nested+0x41/0x80 __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110 btrfs_search_slot+0x3c3/0xb70 do_relocation+0x10c/0x6b0 relocate_tree_blocks+0x317/0x6d0 relocate_block_group+0x1f1/0x560 btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400 btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140 btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40 btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0 do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd -> #0 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0 down_write_nested+0x41/0x80 __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110 btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50 btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70 replace_path+0x541/0x9f0 merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610 merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260 relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560 btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400 btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140 btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40 btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0 do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: btrfs-treloc-02#2 --> btrfs-tree-01 --> btrfs-tree-01/1 Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(btrfs-tree-01/1); lock(btrfs-tree-01); lock(btrfs-tree-01/1); lock(btrfs-treloc-02#2); *** DEADLOCK *** 7 locks held by btrfs/752500: #0: ffff97e292fdf460 (sb_writers#12){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: btrfs_ioctl+0x208/0x2c90 #1: ffff97e284c02050 (&fs_info->reclaim_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_balance+0x55f/0xe40 #2: ffff97e284c00878 (&fs_info->cleaner_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x236/0x400 #3: ffff97e292fdf650 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: merge_reloc_root+0xef/0x610 #4: ffff97e284c02378 (btrfs_trans_num_writers){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0 #5: ffff97e284c023a0 (btrfs_trans_num_extwriters){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0 #6: ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110 stack backtrace: CPU: 1 PID: 752500 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8+ #775 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014 Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x73 check_noncircular+0xd6/0x100 ? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140 __lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0 ? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110 down_write_nested+0x41/0x80 ? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110 __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110 btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50 btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70 ? lock_release+0x137/0x2d0 ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x29/0x50 ? release_extent_buffer+0x128/0x180 replace_path+0x541/0x9f0 merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610 merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260 relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560 btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400 btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140 btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40 btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90 ? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140 ? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140 ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0 do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd This isn't necessarily new, it's just tricky to hit in practice. There are two competing things going on here. With relocation we create a snapshot of every fs tree with a reloc tree. Any extent buffers that get initialized here are initialized with the reloc root lockdep key. However since it is a snapshot, any blocks that are currently in cache that originally belonged to the fs tree will have the normal tree lockdep key set. This creates the lock dependency of reloc tree -> normal tree for the extent buffer locking during the first phase of the relocation as we walk down the reloc root to relocate blocks. However this is problematic because the final phase of the relocation is merging the reloc root into the original fs root. This involves searching down to any keys that exist in the original fs root and then swapping the relocated block and the original fs root block. We have to search down to the fs root first, and then go search the reloc root for the block we need to replace. This creates the dependency of normal tree -> reloc tree which is why lockdep complains. Additionally even if we were to fix this particular mismatch with a different nesting for the merge case, we're still slotting in a block that has a owner of the reloc root objectid into a normal tree, so that block will have its lockdep key set to the tree reloc root, and create a lockdep splat later on when we wander into that block from the fs root. Unfortunately the only solution here is to make sure we do not set the lockdep key to the reloc tree lockdep key normally, and then reset any blocks we wander into from the reloc root when we're doing the merged. This solves the problem of having mixed tree reloc keys intermixed with normal tree keys, and then allows us to make sure in the merge case we maintain the lock order of normal tree -> reloc tree We handle this by setting a bit on the reloc root when we do the search for the block we want to relocate, and any block we search into or COW at that point gets set to the reloc tree key. This works correctly because we only ever COW down to the parent node, so we aren't resetting the key for the block we're linking into the fs root. With this patch we no longer have the lockdep splat in btrfs/187. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: move lockdep class helpers to locking.c

2022-08-17T14:19:10+00:00

These definitions exist in disk-io.c, which is not related to the locking. Move this over to locking.h/c where it makes more sense. Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba