On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 05:39:03PM +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
> This idea is from ext4. By this patch, we can make the dio write parallel,
> and improve the performance.

Interesting, AFAIK, ext4 can only do nolock dio write on some
conditions(should be a overwrite, file size remains unchanged,
no aligned/buffer io in flight), btrfs is ok without any conditions?

thanks,
liubo

> 
> We needn't worry about the race between dio write and truncate, because the
> truncate need wait untill all the dio write end.
> 
> And we also needn't worry about the race between dio write and punch hole,
> because we have extent lock to protect our operation.
> 
> I ran fio to test the performance of this feature.
> 
> == Hardware ==
> CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU     E7500  @ 2.93GHz
> Mem: 2GB
> SSD: Intel X25-M 120GB (Test Partition: 60GB)
> 
> == config file ==
> [global]
> ioengine=psync
> direct=1
> bs=4k
> size=32G
> runtime=60
> directory=/mnt/btrfs/
> filename=testfile
> group_reporting
> thread
> 
> [file1]
> numjobs=1 # 2 4
> rw=randwrite
> 
> == result (KBps) ==
> write 1       2       4
> lock  24936   24738   24726
> nolock        24962   30866   32101
> 
> == result (iops) ==
> write 1       2       4
> lock  6234    6184    6181
> nolock        6240    7716    8025
> 
> Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <[email protected]>
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/inode.c | 24 +++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> index d17a04b..091593a 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> @@ -6589,31 +6589,33 @@ static ssize_t btrfs_direct_IO(int rw, struct kiocb 
> *iocb,
>       struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp;
>       struct inode *inode = file->f_mapping->host;
>       int flags = 0;
> -     bool wakeup = false;
> +     bool wakeup = true;
>       int ret;
>  
>       if (check_direct_IO(BTRFS_I(inode)->root, rw, iocb, iov,
>                           offset, nr_segs))
>               return 0;
>  
> -     if (rw == READ) {
> -             atomic_inc(&inode->i_dio_count);
> -             smp_mb__after_atomic_inc();
> -             if (unlikely(test_bit(BTRFS_INODE_READDIO_NEED_LOCK,
> -                                   &BTRFS_I(inode)->runtime_flags))) {
> -                     inode_dio_done(inode);
> -                     flags = DIO_LOCKING | DIO_SKIP_HOLES;
> -             } else {
> -                     wakeup = true;
> -             }
> +     atomic_inc(&inode->i_dio_count);
> +     smp_mb__after_atomic_inc();
> +     if (rw == WRITE) {
> +             mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
> +     } else if (unlikely(test_bit(BTRFS_INODE_READDIO_NEED_LOCK,
> +                                  &BTRFS_I(inode)->runtime_flags))) {
> +             inode_dio_done(inode);
> +             flags = DIO_LOCKING | DIO_SKIP_HOLES;
> +             wakeup = false;
>       }
>  
>       ret = __blockdev_direct_IO(rw, iocb, inode,
>                       BTRFS_I(inode)->root->fs_info->fs_devices->latest_bdev,
>                       iov, offset, nr_segs, btrfs_get_blocks_direct, NULL,
>                       btrfs_submit_direct, flags);
> +
>       if (wakeup)
>               inode_dio_done(inode);
> +     if (rw == WRITE)
> +             mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
>       return ret;
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 1.7.11.7
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> 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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to