On 08/15, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2018/8/15 10:15, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 08/15, Chao Yu wrote:
> >> On 2018/8/15 1:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> >>> On 08/14, Chao Yu wrote:
> >>>> On 2018/8/14 12:04, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> >>>>> On 08/14, Chao Yu wrote:
> >>>>>> On 2018/8/14 4:11, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 08/13, Chao Yu wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi Jaegeuk,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 2018/8/11 2:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> This reverts the commit - "b93f771 - f2fs: remove writepages lock"
> >>>>>>>>> to fix the drop in sequential read throughput.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Test: ./tiotest -t 32 -d /data/tio_tmp -f 32 -b 524288 -k 1 -k 3 -L
> >>>>>>>>> device: UFS
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Before -
> >>>>>>>>> read throughput: 185 MB/s
> >>>>>>>>> total read requests: 85177 (of these ~80000 are 4KB size requests).
> >>>>>>>>> total write requests: 2546 (of these ~2208 requests are written in
> >>>>>>>>> 512KB).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> After -
> >>>>>>>>> read throughput: 758 MB/s
> >>>>>>>>> total read requests: 2417 (of these ~2042 are 512KB reads).
> >>>>>>>>> total write requests: 2701 (of these ~2034 requests are written in
> >>>>>>>>> 512KB).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> IMO, it only impact sequential read performance in a large file
> >>>>>>>> which may be
> >>>>>>>> fragmented during multi-thread writing.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> In android environment, mostly, the large file should be cold type,
> >>>>>>>> such as apk,
> >>>>>>>> mp3, rmvb, jpeg..., so I think we only need to serialize
> >>>>>>>> writepages() for cold
> >>>>>>>> data area writer.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So how about adding a mount option to serialize writepage() for
> >>>>>>>> different type
> >>>>>>>> of log, e.g. in android, using serialize=4; by default, using
> >>>>>>>> serialize=7
> >>>>>>>> HOT_DATA 1
> >>>>>>>> WARM_DATA 2
> >>>>>>>> COLD_DATA 4
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Well, I don't think we need to give too many mount options for this
> >>>>>>> fragmented
> >>>>>>> case. How about doing this for the large files only like this?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thread A write 512 pages Thread B write 8 pages
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - writepages()
> >>>>>> - mutex_lock(&sbi->writepages);
> >>>>>> - writepage();
> >>>>>> ...
> >>>>>> - writepages()
> >>>>>> - writepage()
> >>>>>> ....
> >>>>>> - writepage();
> >>>>>> ...
> >>>>>> - mutex_unlock(&sbi->writepages);
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Above case will also cause fragmentation since we didn't serialize all
> >>>>>> concurrent IO with the lock.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Do we need to consider such case?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We can simply allow 512 and 8 in the same segment, which would not a
> >>>>> big deal,
> >>>>> when considering starvation of Thread B.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yeah, but in reality, there would be more threads competing in same log
> >>>> header,
> >>>> so I worry that the effect of defragmenting will not so good as we
> >>>> expect,
> >>>> anyway, for benchmark, it's enough.
> >>>
> >>> Basically, I think this is not a benchmark issue. :) It just reveals the
> >>> issue
> >>> much easily. Let me think about three cases:
> >>> 1) WB_SYNC_NONE & WB_SYNC_NONE
> >>> -> can simply use mutex_lock
> >>>
> >>> 2) WB_SYNC_ALL & WB_SYNC_NONE
> >>> -> can use mutex_lock on WB_SYNC_ALL having >512 blocks, while
> >>> WB_SYNC_NONE
> >>> will skip writing blocks
> >>>
> >>> 3) WB_SYNC_ALL & WB_SYNC_ALL
> >>> -> can use mutex_lock on WB_SYNC_ALL having >512 blocks, in order to
> >>> avoid
> >>> starvation.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I've been testing the below.
> >>>
> >>> if (!S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) && (wbc->sync_mode != WB_SYNC_ALL ||
> >>> get_dirty_pages(inode) <= SM_I(sbi)->min_seq_blocks)) {
> >>> mutex_lock(&sbi->writepages);
> >>> locked = true;
> >>
> >> Just cover buffered IO? how about covering Direct IO and atomic write as
> >> well?
> >
> > I'd expect direct IO does in-place-updates, and not sure whether we need to
>
> For initial writes, they are not IPU.
It's a little bit different. DIO allocates blocks first in the bulk mode, and
sumbit bios later. So, it'd be more likely to allocate consecutive blocks by
get_data_block_dio, if user gave a big chunk to write. I'm more concerend about
lock contention, and don't think we have to serialize all the block allocation.
>
> > add another lock contention between buffered or direct IO. Atomic writes
> > would be covered by ->min_seq_blocks.
>
> Okay. :)
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> >From 4fea0b6e4da8512a72dd52afc7a51beb35966ad9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> >>>>>>> >2001
> >>>>>>> From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaeg...@kernel.org>
> >>>>>>> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2018 17:53:34 -0700
> >>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix performance issue observed with
> >>>>>>> multi-thread
> >>>>>>> sequential read
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This reverts the commit - "b93f771 - f2fs: remove writepages lock"
> >>>>>>> to fix the drop in sequential read throughput.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Test: ./tiotest -t 32 -d /data/tio_tmp -f 32 -b 524288 -k 1 -k 3 -L
> >>>>>>> device: UFS
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Before -
> >>>>>>> read throughput: 185 MB/s
> >>>>>>> total read requests: 85177 (of these ~80000 are 4KB size requests).
> >>>>>>> total write requests: 2546 (of these ~2208 requests are written in
> >>>>>>> 512KB).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> After -
> >>>>>>> read throughput: 758 MB/s
> >>>>>>> total read requests: 2417 (of these ~2042 are 512KB reads).
> >>>>>>> total write requests: 2701 (of these ~2034 requests are written in
> >>>>>>> 512KB).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala <stumm...@codeaurora.org>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaeg...@kernel.org>
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs | 8 ++++++++
> >>>>>>> fs/f2fs/data.c | 10 ++++++++++
> >>>>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 2 ++
> >>>>>>> fs/f2fs/segment.c | 1 +
> >>>>>>> fs/f2fs/super.c | 1 +
> >>>>>>> fs/f2fs/sysfs.c | 2 ++
> >>>>>>> 6 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> >>>>>>> b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> >>>>>>> index 9b0123388f18..94a24aedcdb2 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> >>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> >>>>>>> @@ -51,6 +51,14 @@ Description:
> >>>>>>> Controls the dirty page count condition for the
> >>>>>>> in-place-update
> >>>>>>> policies.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +What: /sys/fs/f2fs/<disk>/min_seq_blocks
> >>>>>>> +Date: August 2018
> >>>>>>> +Contact: "Jaegeuk Kim" <jaeg...@kernel.org>
> >>>>>>> +Description:
> >>>>>>> + Controls the dirty page count condition for batched
> >>>>>>> sequential
> >>>>>>> + writes in ->writepages.
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> What: /sys/fs/f2fs/<disk>/min_hot_blocks
> >>>>>>> Date: March 2017
> >>>>>>> Contact: "Jaegeuk Kim" <jaeg...@kernel.org>
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> >>>>>>> index 45f043ee48bd..f09231b1cc74 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> >>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> >>>>>>> @@ -2132,6 +2132,7 @@ static int __f2fs_write_data_pages(struct
> >>>>>>> address_space *mapping,
> >>>>>>> struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
> >>>>>>> struct blk_plug plug;
> >>>>>>> int ret;
> >>>>>>> + bool locked = false;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> /* deal with chardevs and other special file */
> >>>>>>> if (!mapping->a_ops->writepage)
> >>>>>>> @@ -2162,10 +2163,19 @@ static int __f2fs_write_data_pages(struct
> >>>>>>> address_space *mapping,
> >>>>>>> else if (atomic_read(&sbi->wb_sync_req[DATA]))
> >>>>>>> goto skip_write;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> + if (!S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) &&
> >>>>>>> + get_dirty_pages(inode) <=
> >>>>>>> SM_I(sbi)->min_seq_blocks) {
> >>>>>>> + mutex_lock(&sbi->writepages);
> >>>>>>> + locked = true;
> >>>>>>> + }
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> blk_start_plug(&plug);
> >>>>>>> ret = f2fs_write_cache_pages(mapping, wbc, io_type);
> >>>>>>> blk_finish_plug(&plug);
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> + if (locked)
> >>>>>>> + mutex_unlock(&sbi->writepages);
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> if (wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_ALL)
> >>>>>>> atomic_dec(&sbi->wb_sync_req[DATA]);
> >>>>>>> /*
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> >>>>>>> index 375aa9f30cfa..098bdedc28bf 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> >>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> >>>>>>> @@ -913,6 +913,7 @@ struct f2fs_sm_info {
> >>>>>>> unsigned int ipu_policy; /* in-place-update policy */
> >>>>>>> unsigned int min_ipu_util; /* in-place-update threshold */
> >>>>>>> unsigned int min_fsync_blocks; /* threshold for fsync */
> >>>>>>> + unsigned int min_seq_blocks; /* threshold for sequential
> >>>>>>> blocks */
> >>>>>>> unsigned int min_hot_blocks; /* threshold for hot block
> >>>>>>> allocation */
> >>>>>>> unsigned int min_ssr_sections; /* threshold to trigger SSR
> >>>>>>> allocation */
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> @@ -1133,6 +1134,7 @@ struct f2fs_sb_info {
> >>>>>>> struct rw_semaphore sb_lock; /* lock for raw super
> >>>>>>> block */
> >>>>>>> int valid_super_block; /* valid super block no
> >>>>>>> */
> >>>>>>> unsigned long s_flag; /* flags for
> >>>>>>> sbi */
> >>>>>>> + struct mutex writepages; /* mutex for
> >>>>>>> writepages() */
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ZONED
> >>>>>>> unsigned int blocks_per_blkz; /* F2FS blocks per zone
> >>>>>>> */
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> >>>>>>> index 63fc647f9ac2..ffea2d1303bd 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> >>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> >>>>>>> @@ -4131,6 +4131,7 @@ int f2fs_build_segment_manager(struct
> >>>>>>> f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
> >>>>>>> sm_info->ipu_policy = 1 << F2FS_IPU_FSYNC;
> >>>>>>> sm_info->min_ipu_util = DEF_MIN_IPU_UTIL;
> >>>>>>> sm_info->min_fsync_blocks = DEF_MIN_FSYNC_BLOCKS;
> >>>>>>> + sm_info->min_seq_blocks = sbi->blocks_per_seg *
> >>>>>>> sbi->segs_per_sec;
> >>>>>>> sm_info->min_hot_blocks = DEF_MIN_HOT_BLOCKS;
> >>>>>>> sm_info->min_ssr_sections = reserved_sections(sbi);
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
> >>>>>>> index be41dbd7b261..53d70b64fea1 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
> >>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
> >>>>>>> @@ -2842,6 +2842,7 @@ static int f2fs_fill_super(struct super_block
> >>>>>>> *sb, void *data, int silent)
> >>>>>>> /* init f2fs-specific super block info */
> >>>>>>> sbi->valid_super_block = valid_super_block;
> >>>>>>> mutex_init(&sbi->gc_mutex);
> >>>>>>> + mutex_init(&sbi->writepages);
> >>>>>>> mutex_init(&sbi->cp_mutex);
> >>>>>>> init_rwsem(&sbi->node_write);
> >>>>>>> init_rwsem(&sbi->node_change);
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> >>>>>>> index cd2e030e47b8..81c0e5337443 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> >>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> >>>>>>> @@ -397,6 +397,7 @@ F2FS_RW_ATTR(SM_INFO, f2fs_sm_info,
> >>>>>>> batched_trim_sections, trim_sections);
> >>>>>>> F2FS_RW_ATTR(SM_INFO, f2fs_sm_info, ipu_policy, ipu_policy);
> >>>>>>> F2FS_RW_ATTR(SM_INFO, f2fs_sm_info, min_ipu_util, min_ipu_util);
> >>>>>>> F2FS_RW_ATTR(SM_INFO, f2fs_sm_info, min_fsync_blocks,
> >>>>>>> min_fsync_blocks);
> >>>>>>> +F2FS_RW_ATTR(SM_INFO, f2fs_sm_info, min_seq_blocks, min_seq_blocks);
> >>>>>>> F2FS_RW_ATTR(SM_INFO, f2fs_sm_info, min_hot_blocks, min_hot_blocks);
> >>>>>>> F2FS_RW_ATTR(SM_INFO, f2fs_sm_info, min_ssr_sections,
> >>>>>>> min_ssr_sections);
> >>>>>>> F2FS_RW_ATTR(NM_INFO, f2fs_nm_info, ram_thresh, ram_thresh);
> >>>>>>> @@ -449,6 +450,7 @@ static struct attribute *f2fs_attrs[] = {
> >>>>>>> ATTR_LIST(ipu_policy),
> >>>>>>> ATTR_LIST(min_ipu_util),
> >>>>>>> ATTR_LIST(min_fsync_blocks),
> >>>>>>> + ATTR_LIST(min_seq_blocks),
> >>>>>>> ATTR_LIST(min_hot_blocks),
> >>>>>>> ATTR_LIST(min_ssr_sections),
> >>>>>>> ATTR_LIST(max_victim_search),
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> .
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> .
> >>>
> >
> > .
> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
