[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804291459030.17110@engineering.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:12:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mike Anderson <andmike@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Alasdair Graeme Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] Optimize lock in queue unplugging
Hi
Mike Anderson was doing an OLTP benchmark on a computer with 48 physical
disks mapped to one logical device via device mapper.
He found that there was a slowdown on request_queue->lock in function
generic_unplug_device. The slowdown is caused by the fact that when some
code calls unplug on the device mapper, device mapper calls unplug on all
physical disks. These unplug calls take the lock, find that the queue is
already unplugged, release the lock and exit.
With the below patch, performance of the benchmark was increased by 18%
(the whole OLTP application, not just block layer microbenchmarks).
So I'm submitting this patch for upstream. I think the patch is correct,
because when more threads call simultaneously plug and unplug, it is
unspecified, if the queue is or isn't plugged (so the patch can't make
this worse). And the caller that plugged the queue should unplug it
anyway. (if it doesn't, there's 3ms timeout).
Mikulas
Signed-off-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
---
block/blk-core.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6.25/block/blk-core.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.25.orig/block/blk-core.c 2008-04-17 04:49:44.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.25/block/blk-core.c 2008-04-29 18:50:37.000000000 +0200
@@ -271,6 +271,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__generic_unplug_device);
**/
void generic_unplug_device(struct request_queue *q)
{
+ if (likely(!blk_queue_plugged(q)))
+ return;
+
spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
__generic_unplug_device(q);
spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists