Re: [PATCH v2] f2fs: issue multi-device flushes in parallel

Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.file-systems.f2fs,gmane.linux.kernel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 8/6/26 11:08, Yonggil Song wrote:
> 
> On a multi-device setup, submit_flush_wait() walked the dirty devices
> in order and aborted the whole loop on the first device whose flush
> failed, leaving the remaining dirty devices un-flushed. Each device
> still needs its own data made durable, so a failure on one device must
> not skip the others. It also waited for one device's flush to complete
> before issuing the next, even though the devices have independent
> flush queues and could be flushed concurrently.
> 
> Flush every dirty device best-effort and in parallel instead: build
> one PREFLUSH bio per dirty device, submit them all, then wait for
> every completion, returning the first error seen (0 if all succeed).
> This bounds the flush window by the slowest device rather than the sum
> of all of them. No caller depends on the previous early-abort
> behaviour -- fsync only checks whether the return value is zero
> (fs/f2fs/file.c). The checkpoint path (f2fs_flush_device_cache) is
> unaffected; this only touches the fsync flush path.
> 
> The per-device bio/completion array is small and bounded (at most
> MAX_DEVICES entries), so allocate it with __GFP_NOFAIL rather than
> keeping a separate serial fallback path for allocation failure.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yonggil Song <[email protected]>
> ---
>  fs/f2fs/segment.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> index d71ddb3ee918..f3d3343e012f 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> @@ -566,21 +566,63 @@ static int __submit_flush_wait(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static void f2fs_flush_end_io(struct bio *bio)
> +{
> +	complete(bio->bi_private);
> +}
> +
> +struct f2fs_flush_bio {
> +	struct bio bio;
> +	struct completion wait;
> +};
> +
>  static int submit_flush_wait(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, nid_t ino)
>  {
> +	struct f2fs_flush_bio *flush_bio;
> +	unsigned long devices = 0;
>  	int ret = 0;
>  	int i;
>  
>  	if (!f2fs_is_multi_device(sbi))
>  		return __submit_flush_wait(sbi, sbi->sb->s_bdev);
>  
> +	flush_bio = kmalloc(array_size(sbi->s_ndevs, sizeof(*flush_bio)),
> +				GFP_NOFS | __GFP_NOFAIL);
> +
>  	for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++) {
>  		if (!f2fs_is_dirty_device(sbi, ino, i, FLUSH_INO))
>  			continue;
> -		ret = __submit_flush_wait(sbi, FDEV(i).bdev);
> -		if (ret)
> -			break;
> +
> +		bio_init(&flush_bio[i].bio, FDEV(i).bdev, NULL, 0,
> +			 REQ_OP_WRITE | REQ_SYNC | REQ_PREFLUSH);
> +		init_completion(&flush_bio[i].wait);
> +		flush_bio[i].bio.bi_private = &flush_bio[i].wait;
> +		flush_bio[i].bio.bi_end_io = f2fs_flush_end_io;
> +		devices |= BIT(i);

Can we submit bio here?

Thanks,

> +	}
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++) {
> +		if (devices & BIT(i))
> +			submit_bio(&flush_bio[i].bio);
> +	}
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++) {
> +		int err;
> +
> +		if (!(devices & BIT(i)))
> +			continue;
> +
> +		wait_for_completion(&flush_bio[i].wait);
> +		err = blk_status_to_errno(flush_bio[i].bio.bi_status);
> +		trace_f2fs_issue_flush(FDEV(i).bdev, test_opt(sbi, NOBARRIER),
> +				       test_opt(sbi, FLUSH_MERGE), err);
> +		if (!err)
> +			f2fs_update_iostat(sbi, NULL, FS_FLUSH_IO, 0);
> +		else if (!ret)
> +			ret = err;
> +		bio_uninit(&flush_bio[i].bio);
>  	}
> +	kfree(flush_bio);
>  	return ret;
>  }
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.