| 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: <20151228225204.GB61500@jaegeuk.local>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 14:52:05 -0800
From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
To: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] f2fs: export a threshold in sysfs for
controlling dio serialization
Hi Chao,
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 06:05:45PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> As Yunlei He reported when he test with the patch ("f2fs: enhance
> multithread dio write performance"):
> "Does share writepages mutex lock have an effect on cache write?
> Here is AndroBench result on my phone:
>
> Before patch:
> 1R1W 8R8W 16R16W
> Sequential Write 161.31 163.85 154.67
> Random Write 9.48 17.66 18.09
>
> After patch:
> 1R1W 8R8W 16R16W
> Sequential Write 159.61 157.24 160.11
> Random Write 9.17 8.51 8.8
>
> Unit:Mb/s, File size: 64M, Buffer size: 4k"
>
> The turth is androidbench uses single thread with dio write to test performance
> of sequential write, and use multi-threads with dio write to test performance
> of random write. so we can not see any improvement in sequentail write test
> since serializing dio page allocation can only improve performance in
> multi-thread scenario, and there is a regression in multi-thread test with 4k
> dio write, this is because grabbing sbi->writepages lock for serializing block
> allocation stop the concurrency, so that less small dio bios could be merged,
> moreover, when there are huge number of small dio writes, grabbing mutex lock
> per dio increases the overhead.
>
> After all, serializing dio could only be used for concurrent scenario of
> big dio, so this patch introduces a threshold in sysfs to provide user the
> interface of defining 'a big dio' with specified page number, which could
> be used to control wthether serialize or not that kind of dio with specified
> page number.
Can you merge two patches together?
And, if this is correct, can we investigate the lock effect in
f2fs_write_data_pages too?
What if we add a condition for the lock like this?
if (get_dirty_pages(inode) > serialzed_pages)
mutex_lock();
Thanks,
>
> Though, this is only RFC patch since the optimization works in rare scenario.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
> ---
> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs | 12 ++++++++++++
> fs/f2fs/data.c | 3 ++-
> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 3 +++
> fs/f2fs/super.c | 3 +++
> 4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> index 0345f2d..560a4f1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> @@ -92,3 +92,15 @@ Date: October 2015
> Contact: "Chao Yu" <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
> Description:
> Controls the count of nid pages to be readaheaded.
> +
> +What: /sys/fs/f2fs/<disk>/serialized_dio_pages
> +Date: December 2015
> +Contact: "Chao Yu" <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
> +Description:
> + It is a threshold with the unit of page size.
> + If DIO page count is equal or big than the threshold,
> + whole process of block address allocation of dio pages
> + will become atomic like buffered write.
> + It is used to maximize bandwidth utilization in the
> + scenario of concurrent write with dio vs buffered or
> + dio vs dio.
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> index 6b24446..abcd100 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> @@ -1660,7 +1660,8 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,
> trace_f2fs_direct_IO_enter(inode, offset, count, rw);
>
> if (rw == WRITE) {
> - bool serialized = (F2FS_BYTES_TO_BLK(count) >= 64);
> + bool serialized = (F2FS_BYTES_TO_BLK(count) >=
> + sbi->serialized_dio_pages);
>
> if (serialized)
> mutex_lock(&sbi->writepages);
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> index 3406e99..8f35dd7 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> @@ -333,6 +333,8 @@ enum {
>
> #define MAX_DIR_RA_PAGES 4 /* maximum ra pages of dir */
>
> +#define DEF_SERIALIZED_DIO_PAGES 64 /* default serialized dio pages */
> +
> /* vector size for gang look-up from extent cache that consists of radix tree */
> #define EXT_TREE_VEC_SIZE 64
>
> @@ -784,6 +786,7 @@ struct f2fs_sb_info {
> unsigned int total_valid_inode_count; /* valid inode count */
> int active_logs; /* # of active logs */
> int dir_level; /* directory level */
> + int serialized_dio_pages; /* serialized direct IO pages */
>
> block_t user_block_count; /* # of user blocks */
> block_t total_valid_block_count; /* # of valid blocks */
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
> index 75704d9..ebe9bd4 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
> @@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ F2FS_RW_ATTR(NM_INFO, f2fs_nm_info, ram_thresh, ram_thresh);
> F2FS_RW_ATTR(NM_INFO, f2fs_nm_info, ra_nid_pages, ra_nid_pages);
> F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_sb_info, max_victim_search, max_victim_search);
> F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_sb_info, dir_level, dir_level);
> +F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_sb_info, serialized_dio_pages, serialized_dio_pages);
> F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_sb_info, cp_interval, cp_interval);
>
> #define ATTR_LIST(name) (&f2fs_attr_##name.attr)
> @@ -234,6 +235,7 @@ static struct attribute *f2fs_attrs[] = {
> ATTR_LIST(min_fsync_blocks),
> ATTR_LIST(max_victim_search),
> ATTR_LIST(dir_level),
> + ATTR_LIST(serialized_dio_pages),
> ATTR_LIST(ram_thresh),
> ATTR_LIST(ra_nid_pages),
> ATTR_LIST(cp_interval),
> @@ -1125,6 +1127,7 @@ static void init_sb_info(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
> atomic_set(&sbi->nr_pages[i], 0);
>
> sbi->dir_level = DEF_DIR_LEVEL;
> + sbi->serialized_dio_pages = DEF_SERIALIZED_DIO_PAGES;
> sbi->cp_interval = DEF_CP_INTERVAL;
> clear_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
>
> --
> 2.6.3
>
--
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