| Message ID | 20180115061352.13799-1-wqu@suse.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 15.01.2018 08:13, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Enospc_debug makes extent allocator to print more debug messages, > however for chunk allocation, there is no debug message for enospc_debug > at all. > > This patch will add message for the following parts of chunk allocator: > > 1) No rw device at all > Quite rare, but at least output one message for this case. > > 2) No enough space for some device > This debug message is quite handy for unbalanced disks with stripe > based profiles (RAID0/10/5/6). > > 3) Not enough free devices > This debug message should tell us if current chunk allocator is > working correctly on minimal device requirement. > > Although under most case, we will hit other ENOSPC before we even hit a > chunk allocator ENOSPC, but such debug info won't help. > > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > index a25684287501..664d8a1b90b3 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > @@ -4622,8 +4622,11 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > > BUG_ON(!alloc_profile_is_valid(type, 0)); > > - if (list_empty(&fs_devices->alloc_list)) > + if (list_empty(&fs_devices->alloc_list)) { > + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) > + btrfs_warn(info, "%s: No writable device", __func__); perhaps this shouldn't be gated on ENOSPC_DEBUG if it's a warning, or if it's to be gated then make it a DEBUG. > return -ENOSPC; > + } > > index = __get_raid_index(type); > > @@ -4705,8 +4708,14 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > if (ret == 0) > max_avail = max_stripe_size * dev_stripes; > > - if (max_avail < BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes) > + if (max_avail < BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes) { > + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) > + btrfs_debug(info, > + "%s: devid %llu has no free space, have=%llu want=%u", > + __func__, device->devid, max_avail, > + BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes); Here we have a debug output gated on ENOSCP_DEBUG so let's be consistent (hence my previous comment) > continue; > + } > > if (ndevs == fs_devices->rw_devices) { > WARN(1, "%s: found more than %llu devices\n", > @@ -4731,6 +4740,12 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > > if (ndevs < devs_increment * sub_stripes || ndevs < devs_min) { > ret = -ENOSPC; > + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) { > + btrfs_debug(info, > + "%s: not enough devices with free space: have=%d minimal=%d increment=%d", > + __func__, ndevs, devs_min, > + devs_increment * sub_stripes); Without looking at the code it's not really obvious what increment is. Perhaps you can use a more descriptive word? > + } > goto error; > } > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 2018年01月16日 21:47, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 15.01.2018 08:13, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> Enospc_debug makes extent allocator to print more debug messages, >> however for chunk allocation, there is no debug message for enospc_debug >> at all. >> >> This patch will add message for the following parts of chunk allocator: >> >> 1) No rw device at all >> Quite rare, but at least output one message for this case. >> >> 2) No enough space for some device >> This debug message is quite handy for unbalanced disks with stripe >> based profiles (RAID0/10/5/6). >> >> 3) Not enough free devices >> This debug message should tell us if current chunk allocator is >> working correctly on minimal device requirement. >> >> Although under most case, we will hit other ENOSPC before we even hit a >> chunk allocator ENOSPC, but such debug info won't help. >> >> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> >> --- >> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >> index a25684287501..664d8a1b90b3 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >> @@ -4622,8 +4622,11 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >> >> BUG_ON(!alloc_profile_is_valid(type, 0)); >> >> - if (list_empty(&fs_devices->alloc_list)) >> + if (list_empty(&fs_devices->alloc_list)) { >> + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) >> + btrfs_warn(info, "%s: No writable device", __func__); > > perhaps this shouldn't be gated on ENOSPC_DEBUG if it's a warning, or if > it's to be gated then make it a DEBUG. Because the case of no writeable device is rare. But change it to debug seems good. > >> return -ENOSPC; >> + } >> >> index = __get_raid_index(type); >> >> @@ -4705,8 +4708,14 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >> if (ret == 0) >> max_avail = max_stripe_size * dev_stripes; >> >> - if (max_avail < BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes) >> + if (max_avail < BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes) { >> + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) >> + btrfs_debug(info, >> + "%s: devid %llu has no free space, have=%llu want=%u", >> + __func__, device->devid, max_avail, >> + BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes); > > Here we have a debug output gated on ENOSCP_DEBUG so let's be consistent > (hence my previous comment) >> continue; >> + } >> >> if (ndevs == fs_devices->rw_devices) { >> WARN(1, "%s: found more than %llu devices\n", >> @@ -4731,6 +4740,12 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >> >> if (ndevs < devs_increment * sub_stripes || ndevs < devs_min) { >> ret = -ENOSPC; >> + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) { >> + btrfs_debug(info, >> + "%s: not enough devices with free space: have=%d minimal=%d increment=%d", >> + __func__, ndevs, devs_min, >> + devs_increment * sub_stripes); > > Without looking at the code it's not really obvious what increment is. > Perhaps you can use a more descriptive word? "increment" is indeed less meaningful. I'll change it to only output "minimal" just min(minimal, devs_min). Thanks, Qu > >> + } >> goto error; >> } >> >> > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
On 17.01.2018 02:52, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > On 2018年01月16日 21:47, Nikolay Borisov wrote: >> >> >> On 15.01.2018 08:13, Qu Wenruo wrote: >>> Enospc_debug makes extent allocator to print more debug messages, >>> however for chunk allocation, there is no debug message for enospc_debug >>> at all. >>> >>> This patch will add message for the following parts of chunk allocator: >>> >>> 1) No rw device at all >>> Quite rare, but at least output one message for this case. >>> >>> 2) No enough space for some device >>> This debug message is quite handy for unbalanced disks with stripe >>> based profiles (RAID0/10/5/6). >>> >>> 3) Not enough free devices >>> This debug message should tell us if current chunk allocator is >>> working correctly on minimal device requirement. >>> >>> Although under most case, we will hit other ENOSPC before we even hit a >>> chunk allocator ENOSPC, but such debug info won't help. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> >>> --- >>> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >>> index a25684287501..664d8a1b90b3 100644 >>> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >>> @@ -4622,8 +4622,11 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >>> >>> BUG_ON(!alloc_profile_is_valid(type, 0)); >>> >>> - if (list_empty(&fs_devices->alloc_list)) >>> + if (list_empty(&fs_devices->alloc_list)) { >>> + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) >>> + btrfs_warn(info, "%s: No writable device", __func__); >> >> perhaps this shouldn't be gated on ENOSPC_DEBUG if it's a warning, or if >> it's to be gated then make it a DEBUG. > > Because the case of no writeable device is rare. > > But change it to debug seems good. > >> >>> return -ENOSPC; >>> + } >>> >>> index = __get_raid_index(type); >>> >>> @@ -4705,8 +4708,14 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >>> if (ret == 0) >>> max_avail = max_stripe_size * dev_stripes; >>> >>> - if (max_avail < BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes) >>> + if (max_avail < BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes) { >>> + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) >>> + btrfs_debug(info, >>> + "%s: devid %llu has no free space, have=%llu want=%u", >>> + __func__, device->devid, max_avail, >>> + BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes); >> >> Here we have a debug output gated on ENOSCP_DEBUG so let's be consistent >> (hence my previous comment) >>> continue; >>> + } >>> >>> if (ndevs == fs_devices->rw_devices) { >>> WARN(1, "%s: found more than %llu devices\n", >>> @@ -4731,6 +4740,12 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >>> >>> if (ndevs < devs_increment * sub_stripes || ndevs < devs_min) { >>> ret = -ENOSPC; >>> + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) { >>> + btrfs_debug(info, >>> + "%s: not enough devices with free space: have=%d minimal=%d increment=%d", >>> + __func__, ndevs, devs_min, >>> + devs_increment * sub_stripes); >> >> Without looking at the code it's not really obvious what increment is. >> Perhaps you can use a more descriptive word? > > "increment" is indeed less meaningful. > > I'll change it to only output "minimal" just min(minimal, devs_min). I think that 'minimal' should be 'minimal required' > > Thanks, > Qu > >> >>> + } >>> goto error; >>> } >>> >>> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c index a25684287501..664d8a1b90b3 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c @@ -4622,8 +4622,11 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, BUG_ON(!alloc_profile_is_valid(type, 0)); - if (list_empty(&fs_devices->alloc_list)) + if (list_empty(&fs_devices->alloc_list)) { + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) + btrfs_warn(info, "%s: No writable device", __func__); return -ENOSPC; + } index = __get_raid_index(type); @@ -4705,8 +4708,14 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, if (ret == 0) max_avail = max_stripe_size * dev_stripes; - if (max_avail < BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes) + if (max_avail < BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes) { + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) + btrfs_debug(info, + "%s: devid %llu has no free space, have=%llu want=%u", + __func__, device->devid, max_avail, + BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN * dev_stripes); continue; + } if (ndevs == fs_devices->rw_devices) { WARN(1, "%s: found more than %llu devices\n", @@ -4731,6 +4740,12 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, if (ndevs < devs_increment * sub_stripes || ndevs < devs_min) { ret = -ENOSPC; + if (btrfs_test_opt(info, ENOSPC_DEBUG)) { + btrfs_debug(info, + "%s: not enough devices with free space: have=%d minimal=%d increment=%d", + __func__, ndevs, devs_min, + devs_increment * sub_stripes); + } goto error; }
Enospc_debug makes extent allocator to print more debug messages, however for chunk allocation, there is no debug message for enospc_debug at all. This patch will add message for the following parts of chunk allocator: 1) No rw device at all Quite rare, but at least output one message for this case. 2) No enough space for some device This debug message is quite handy for unbalanced disks with stripe based profiles (RAID0/10/5/6). 3) Not enough free devices This debug message should tell us if current chunk allocator is working correctly on minimal device requirement. Although under most case, we will hit other ENOSPC before we even hit a chunk allocator ENOSPC, but such debug info won't help. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> --- fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)