| 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: <20110317130846.GA8188@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 09:08:46 -0400
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>
Cc: Mustafa Mesanovic <mume@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
dm-devel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, cotte@...ibm.com,
ehrhardt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, hare@...e.de
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] dm: improve read performance
On Thu, Mar 17 2011 at 1:12am -0400,
Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de> wrote:
> On Monday, March 07, 2011 03:40:01 pm Mustafa Mesanovic wrote:
> > On 12/27/2010 01:23 PM, Mustafa Mesanovic wrote:
> > > On Mon December 27 2010 12:54:59 Neil Brown wrote:
> > >> On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 12:19:55 +0100 Mustafa Mesanovic
> > >>
> > >> <mume@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >>> From: Mustafa Mesanovic<mume@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > >>>
> > >>> A short explanation in prior: in this case we have "stacked" dm
> > >>> devices. Two multipathed luns combined together to one striped logical
> > >>> volume.
> > >>>
> > >>> I/O throughput degradation happens at __bio_add_page when bio's get
> > >>> checked upon max_sectors. In this setup max_sectors is always set to 8
> > >>> -> what is 4KiB.
> > >>> A standalone striped logical volume on luns which are not multipathed
> > >>> do not have the problem: the logical volume will take over the
> > >>> max_sectors from luns below.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >>> Using the patch improves read I/O up to 3x. In this specific case from
> > >>> 600MiB/s up to 1800MiB/s.
> > >>
> > >> and using this patch will cause IO to fail sometimes.
> > >> If an IO request which is larger than a page crosses a device boundary
> > >> in the underlying e.g. RAID0, the RAID0 will return an error as such
> > >> things should not happen - they are prevented by merge_bvec_fn.
> > >>
> > >> If merge_bvec_fn is not being honoured, then you MUST limit requests to
> > >> a single entry iovec of at most one page.
> > >>
> > >> NeilBrown
> > >
> > > Thank you for that hint, I will try to write a merge_bvec_fn for
> > > dm-stripe.c which solves the problem, if that is ok?
> > >
> > > Mustafa Mesanovic
> >
> > Now here my new suggestion to fix this issue, what is your opinion?
> > I tested this with different setups, and it worked fine and I had
> > very good performance improvements.
> >
>
> Some minor style nitpicks.
>
> > [RFC][PATCH] dm: improve read performance - v2
> >
> > This patch adds a merge_fn for the dm stripe target. This merge_fn
> > prevents dm_set_device_limits() setting the max_sectors to 4KiB
> > (PAGE_SIZE). (As in a prior patch already mentioned.)
> > Now the read performance improved up to 3x higher compared to before.
> >
> > What happened before:
> > I/O throughput degradation happened at __bio_add_page() when bio's got
> > checked at the very beginning upon max_sectors. In this setup max_sectors
> > is always set to 8. So bio's entered the dm target with a max of 4KiB.
> >
> > Now dm-stripe target will have its own merge_fn so max_sectors will not
> > pushed down to 8 (4KiB), and bio's can get bigger than 4KiB.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mustafa Mesanovic<mume@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >
> > dm-stripe.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
> >
> > Index: linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-stripe.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/md/dm-stripe.c 2011-02-28 10:23:37.000000000
> > +0100 +++ linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-stripe.c 2011-02-28 10:24:29.000000000
> > +0100 @@ -396,6 +396,29 @@
> > blk_limits_io_opt(limits, chunk_size * sc->stripes);
> > }
> >
> > +static int stripe_merge(struct dm_target *ti, struct bvec_merge_data *bvm,
> > + struct bio_vec *biovec, int max_size)
> > +{
> > + struct stripe_c *sc = (struct stripe_c *) ti->private;
> > + sector_t offset, chunk;
> > + uint32_t stripe;
> > + struct request_queue *q;
> > +
> > + offset = bvm->bi_sector - ti->begin;
> > + chunk = offset>> sc->chunk_shift;
> > + stripe = sector_div(chunk, sc->stripes);
> > +
> > + if (!bdev_get_queue(sc->stripe[stripe].dev->bdev)->merge_bvec_fn)
> > + return max_size;
> > +
> > + bvm->bi_bdev = sc->stripe[stripe].dev->bdev;
> > + q = bdev_get_queue(bvm->bi_bdev);
>
> Initializing q at the top would simplify the check fro merge_bvec_fn above.
>
> > + bvm->bi_sector = sc->stripe[stripe].physical_start +
> > + (chunk<< sc->chunk_shift) + (offset& sc->chunk_mask);
> > +
>
> Can this be written as
>
> bvm->bi_sector = sc->stripe[stripe].physical_start +
> bvm->bi_sector - ti->begin;
>
> or even better
> bvm->bi_sector = sc->stripe[stripe].physical_start +
> dm_target_offset(ti, bvm->bi_sector);
>
> >
> > + return min(max_size, q->merge_bvec_fn(q, bvm, biovec));
> > +}
> > +
> > static struct target_type stripe_target = {
> > .name = "striped",
> > .version = {1, 3, 1},
> > @@ -403,6 +426,7 @@
> > .ctr = stripe_ctr,
> > .dtr = stripe_dtr,
> > .map = stripe_map,
> > + .merge = stripe_merge,
> > .end_io = stripe_end_io,
> > .status = stripe_status,
> > .iterate_devices = stripe_iterate_devices,
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Reviewed-by: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>
You reviewed an old version, v4 was posted to dm-devel and is
available here: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/639801/
It should address all your concerns.
--
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