| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20091228085221.GA3769@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:52:21 +0800
From: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
To: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@...il.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"jens.axboe@...cle.com" <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
"jmoyer@...hat.com" <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin.zhang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]cfq-iosched: split seeky coop queues after one slice
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 04:40:30PM +0800, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 06:16:27PM +0800, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> >> Hi Shaohua,
> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com> wrote:
> >> > df5fe3e8e13883f58dc97489076bbcc150789a21
> >> > b3b6d0408c953524f979468562e7e210d8634150
> >> > The coop merge is too aggressive. For example, if two tasks are reading two
> >> > files where the two files have some adjecent blocks, cfq will immediately
> >> > merge them. cfq_rq_close() also has trouble, sometimes the seek_mean is very
> >> > big. I did a test to make cfq_rq_close() always checks the distence according
> >> > to CIC_SEEK_THR, but still saw a lot of wrong merge. (BTW, why we take a long
> >> > distence far away request as close. Taking them close doesn't improve any thoughtput
> >> > to me. Maybe we should always use CIC_SEEK_THR as close criteria).
> >> Yes, when deciding if two queues are going to be merged, we should use
> >> the constant CIC_SEEK_THR.
> >> > So sounds we need make split more aggressive. But the split is too lazay,
> >> > which requires to wait 1s. Time based check isn't reliable as queue might not
> >> > run at given time, so uses a small time isn't ok.
> >> 1s is too much, but I wouldn't abandon a time based approach. To fix
> >> the problem of queue not being run, you can consider a slice. If at
> >> the end of the slice, the queue is seeky, you split it.
> >
> > Currently we split seeky coop queues after 1s, which is too big. Below patch
> > marks seeky coop queue split_coop flag after one slice. After that, if new
> > requests come in, the queues will be splitted. Patch is suggested by Corrado.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
> You can also remove the no longer used define:
> #define CFQQ_COOP_TOUT (HZ)
>
> Reviewed-by: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@...il.com>
forgot about that macro, updated patch.
Currently we split seeky coop queues after 1s, which is too big. Below patch
marks seeky coop queue split_coop flag after one slice. After that, if new
requests come in, the queues will be splitted. Patch is suggested by Corrado.
Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Reviewed-by: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@...il.com>
diff --git a/block/cfq-iosched.c b/block/cfq-iosched.c
index e2f8046..348618f 100644
--- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
@@ -42,16 +42,13 @@ static const int cfq_hist_divisor = 4;
*/
#define CFQ_MIN_TT (2)
-/*
- * Allow merged cfqqs to perform this amount of seeky I/O before
- * deciding to break the queues up again.
- */
-#define CFQQ_COOP_TOUT (HZ)
-
#define CFQ_SLICE_SCALE (5)
#define CFQ_HW_QUEUE_MIN (5)
#define CFQ_SERVICE_SHIFT 12
+#define CFQQ_SEEK_THR 8 * 1024
+#define CFQQ_SEEKY(cfqq) ((cfqq)->seek_mean > CFQQ_SEEK_THR)
+
#define RQ_CIC(rq) \
((struct cfq_io_context *) (rq)->elevator_private)
#define RQ_CFQQ(rq) (struct cfq_queue *) ((rq)->elevator_private2)
@@ -137,7 +134,6 @@ struct cfq_queue {
u64 seek_total;
sector_t seek_mean;
sector_t last_request_pos;
- unsigned long seeky_start;
pid_t pid;
@@ -317,6 +313,7 @@ enum cfqq_state_flags {
CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_slice_new, /* no requests dispatched in slice */
CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_sync, /* synchronous queue */
CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_coop, /* cfqq is shared */
+ CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_split_coop, /* shared cfqq will be splitted */
CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_deep, /* sync cfqq experienced large depth */
CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_wait_busy, /* Waiting for next request */
};
@@ -345,6 +342,7 @@ CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(prio_changed);
CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(slice_new);
CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(sync);
CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(coop);
+CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(split_coop);
CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(deep);
CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(wait_busy);
#undef CFQ_CFQQ_FNS
@@ -1574,6 +1572,15 @@ __cfq_slice_expired(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *cfqq,
cfq_clear_cfqq_wait_busy(cfqq);
/*
+ * If this cfqq is shared between multiple processes, check to
+ * make sure that those processes are still issuing I/Os within
+ * the mean seek distance. If not, it may be time to break the
+ * queues apart again.
+ */
+ if (cfq_cfqq_coop(cfqq) && CFQQ_SEEKY(cfqq))
+ cfq_mark_cfqq_split_coop(cfqq);
+
+ /*
* store what was left of this slice, if the queue idled/timed out
*/
if (timed_out && !cfq_cfqq_slice_new(cfqq)) {
@@ -1671,9 +1678,6 @@ static inline sector_t cfq_dist_from_last(struct cfq_data *cfqd,
return cfqd->last_position - blk_rq_pos(rq);
}
-#define CFQQ_SEEK_THR 8 * 1024
-#define CFQQ_SEEKY(cfqq) ((cfqq)->seek_mean > CFQQ_SEEK_THR)
-
static inline int cfq_rq_close(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *cfqq,
struct request *rq)
{
@@ -3027,19 +3031,6 @@ cfq_update_io_seektime(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *cfqq,
total = cfqq->seek_total + (cfqq->seek_samples/2);
do_div(total, cfqq->seek_samples);
cfqq->seek_mean = (sector_t)total;
-
- /*
- * If this cfqq is shared between multiple processes, check to
- * make sure that those processes are still issuing I/Os within
- * the mean seek distance. If not, it may be time to break the
- * queues apart again.
- */
- if (cfq_cfqq_coop(cfqq)) {
- if (CFQQ_SEEKY(cfqq) && !cfqq->seeky_start)
- cfqq->seeky_start = jiffies;
- else if (!CFQQ_SEEKY(cfqq))
- cfqq->seeky_start = 0;
- }
}
/*
@@ -3474,14 +3465,6 @@ cfq_merge_cfqqs(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_io_context *cic,
return cic_to_cfqq(cic, 1);
}
-static int should_split_cfqq(struct cfq_queue *cfqq)
-{
- if (cfqq->seeky_start &&
- time_after(jiffies, cfqq->seeky_start + CFQQ_COOP_TOUT))
- return 1;
- return 0;
-}
-
/*
* Returns NULL if a new cfqq should be allocated, or the old cfqq if this
* was the last process referring to said cfqq.
@@ -3490,9 +3473,9 @@ static struct cfq_queue *
split_cfqq(struct cfq_io_context *cic, struct cfq_queue *cfqq)
{
if (cfqq_process_refs(cfqq) == 1) {
- cfqq->seeky_start = 0;
cfqq->pid = current->pid;
cfq_clear_cfqq_coop(cfqq);
+ cfq_clear_cfqq_split_coop(cfqq);
return cfqq;
}
@@ -3531,7 +3514,7 @@ new_queue:
/*
* If the queue was seeky for too long, break it apart.
*/
- if (cfq_cfqq_coop(cfqq) && should_split_cfqq(cfqq)) {
+ if (cfq_cfqq_coop(cfqq) && cfq_cfqq_split_coop(cfqq)) {
cfq_log_cfqq(cfqd, cfqq, "breaking apart cfqq");
cfqq = split_cfqq(cic, cfqq);
if (!cfqq)
--
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