[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48edcfc1-030d-f78e-ee88-2a9a8cc467ac@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2022 09:26:38 +0800
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
To: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
CC: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v10 3/4] block, bfq: refactor the counting of
'num_groups_with_pending_reqs'
在 2022/06/23 23:32, Paolo Valente 写道:
> Sorry for the delay.
>
>> Il giorno 10 giu 2022, alle ore 04:17, Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com> ha scritto:
>>
>> Currently, bfq can't handle sync io concurrently as long as they
>> are not issued from root group. This is because
>> 'bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs > 0' is always true in
>> bfq_asymmetric_scenario().
>>
>> The way that bfqg is counted into 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs':
>>
>> Before this patch:
>> 1) root group will never be counted.
>> 2) Count if bfqg or it's child bfqgs have pending requests.
>> 3) Don't count if bfqg and it's child bfqgs complete all the requests.
>>
>> After this patch:
>> 1) root group is counted.
>> 2) Count if bfqg have pending requests.
>> 3) Don't count if bfqg complete all the requests.
>>
>> With this change, the occasion that only one group is activated can be
>> detected, and next patch will support concurrent sync io in the
>> occasion.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
>> ---
>> block/bfq-iosched.c | 42 ------------------------------------------
>> block/bfq-iosched.h | 18 +++++++++---------
>> block/bfq-wf2q.c | 19 ++++---------------
>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
>> index 0ec21018daba..03b04892440c 100644
>> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
>> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
>> @@ -970,48 +970,6 @@ void __bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
>> void bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
>> struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
>> {
>> - struct bfq_entity *entity = bfqq->entity.parent;
>> -
>> - for_each_entity(entity) {
>> - struct bfq_sched_data *sd = entity->my_sched_data;
>> -
>> - if (sd->next_in_service || sd->in_service_entity) {
>> - /*
>> - * entity is still active, because either
>> - * next_in_service or in_service_entity is not
>> - * NULL (see the comments on the definition of
>> - * next_in_service for details on why
>> - * in_service_entity must be checked too).
>> - *
>> - * As a consequence, its parent entities are
>> - * active as well, and thus this loop must
>> - * stop here.
>> - */
>> - break;
>> - }
>> -
>> - /*
>> - * The decrement of num_groups_with_pending_reqs is
>> - * not performed immediately upon the deactivation of
>> - * entity, but it is delayed to when it also happens
>> - * that the first leaf descendant bfqq of entity gets
>> - * all its pending requests completed. The following
>> - * instructions perform this delayed decrement, if
>> - * needed. See the comments on
>> - * num_groups_with_pending_reqs for details.
>> - */
>> - if (entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
>> - entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = false;
>> - bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs--;
>> - }
>> - }
>
> With this part removed, I'm missing how you handle the following
> sequence of events:
> 1. a queue Q becomes non busy but still has dispatched requests, so
> it must not be removed from the counter of queues with pending reqs
> yet
> 2. the last request of Q is completed with Q being still idle (non
> busy). At this point Q must be removed from the counter. It seems to
> me that this case is not handled any longer
>
Hi, Paolo
1) At first, patch 1 support to track if bfqq has pending requests, it's
done by setting the flag 'entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs' when the
first request is inserted to bfqq, and it's cleared when the last
request is completed.
2) Then, patch 2 add a counter in bfqg: how many bfqqs have pending
requests, which is updated while tracking if bfqq has pending requests.
3) Finally, patch 3 tracks 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs' based on the
new counter in patch 2:
- if the counter(how many bfqqs have pending requests) increased from 0
to 0, increase 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs'.
- if the counter is decreased from 1 to 0, decrease
'num_groups_with_pending_reqs'
> Additional comment: if your changes do not cpus the problem above,
> then this function only invokes __bfq_weights_tree_remove. So what's
> the point in keeping this function)
If this patchset is applied, there are following cleanup patches to
remove this function.
multiple cleanup patches for bfq:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220528095958.270455-1-yukuai3@huawei.com/
>
>> -
>> - /*
>> - * Next function is invoked last, because it causes bfqq to be
>> - * freed if the following holds: bfqq is not in service and
>> - * has no dispatched request. DO NOT use bfqq after the next
>> - * function invocation.
>> - */
>
> I would really love it if you leave this comment. I added it after
> suffering a lot for a nasty UAF. Of course the first sentence may
> need to be adjusted if the code that precedes it is to be removed.
>
Same as above, if this patch is applied, this function will be gone.
Thanks,
Kuai
> Thanks,
> Paolo
>
>
>> __bfq_weights_tree_remove(bfqd, bfqq,
>> &bfqd->queue_weights_tree);
>> }
>> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.h b/block/bfq-iosched.h
>> index de2446a9b7ab..f0fce94583e4 100644
>> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.h
>> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.h
>> @@ -496,27 +496,27 @@ struct bfq_data {
>> struct rb_root_cached queue_weights_tree;
>>
>> /*
>> - * Number of groups with at least one descendant process that
>> + * Number of groups with at least one process that
>> * has at least one request waiting for completion. Note that
>> * this accounts for also requests already dispatched, but not
>> * yet completed. Therefore this number of groups may differ
>> * (be larger) than the number of active groups, as a group is
>> * considered active only if its corresponding entity has
>> - * descendant queues with at least one request queued. This
>> + * queues with at least one request queued. This
>> * number is used to decide whether a scenario is symmetric.
>> * For a detailed explanation see comments on the computation
>> * of the variable asymmetric_scenario in the function
>> * bfq_better_to_idle().
>> *
>> * However, it is hard to compute this number exactly, for
>> - * groups with multiple descendant processes. Consider a group
>> - * that is inactive, i.e., that has no descendant process with
>> + * groups with multiple processes. Consider a group
>> + * that is inactive, i.e., that has no process with
>> * pending I/O inside BFQ queues. Then suppose that
>> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs is still accounting for this
>> - * group, because the group has descendant processes with some
>> + * group, because the group has processes with some
>> * I/O request still in flight. num_groups_with_pending_reqs
>> * should be decremented when the in-flight request of the
>> - * last descendant process is finally completed (assuming that
>> + * last process is finally completed (assuming that
>> * nothing else has changed for the group in the meantime, in
>> * terms of composition of the group and active/inactive state of child
>> * groups and processes). To accomplish this, an additional
>> @@ -525,7 +525,7 @@ struct bfq_data {
>> * we resort to the following tradeoff between simplicity and
>> * accuracy: for an inactive group that is still counted in
>> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs, we decrement
>> - * num_groups_with_pending_reqs when the first descendant
>> + * num_groups_with_pending_reqs when the first
>> * process of the group remains with no request waiting for
>> * completion.
>> *
>> @@ -533,12 +533,12 @@ struct bfq_data {
>> * carefulness: to avoid multiple decrements, we flag a group,
>> * more precisely an entity representing a group, as still
>> * counted in num_groups_with_pending_reqs when it becomes
>> - * inactive. Then, when the first descendant queue of the
>> + * inactive. Then, when the first queue of the
>> * entity remains with no request waiting for completion,
>> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs is decremented, and this flag
>> * is reset. After this flag is reset for the entity,
>> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs won't be decremented any
>> - * longer in case a new descendant queue of the entity remains
>> + * longer in case a new queue of the entity remains
>> * with no request waiting for completion.
>> */
>> unsigned int num_groups_with_pending_reqs;
>> diff --git a/block/bfq-wf2q.c b/block/bfq-wf2q.c
>> index 6f36f3fe5cc8..9c2842bedf97 100644
>> --- a/block/bfq-wf2q.c
>> +++ b/block/bfq-wf2q.c
>> @@ -984,19 +984,6 @@ static void __bfq_activate_entity(struct bfq_entity *entity,
>> entity->on_st_or_in_serv = true;
>> }
>>
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED
>> - if (!bfq_entity_to_bfqq(entity)) { /* bfq_group */
>> - struct bfq_group *bfqg =
>> - container_of(entity, struct bfq_group, entity);
>> - struct bfq_data *bfqd = bfqg->bfqd;
>> -
>> - if (!entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
>> - entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = true;
>> - bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs++;
>> - }
>> - }
>> -#endif
>> -
>> bfq_update_fin_time_enqueue(entity, st, backshifted);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -1654,7 +1641,8 @@ void bfq_add_bfqq_in_groups_with_pending_reqs(struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
>> if (!entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
>> entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = true;
>> #ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED
>> - bfqq_group(bfqq)->num_queues_with_pending_reqs++;
>> + if (!(bfqq_group(bfqq)->num_queues_with_pending_reqs++))
>> + bfqq->bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs++;
>> #endif
>> }
>> }
>> @@ -1666,7 +1654,8 @@ void bfq_del_bfqq_in_groups_with_pending_reqs(struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
>> if (entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
>> entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = false;
>> #ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED
>> - bfqq_group(bfqq)->num_queues_with_pending_reqs--;
>> + if (!(--bfqq_group(bfqq)->num_queues_with_pending_reqs))
>> + bfqq->bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs--;
>> #endif
>> }
>> }
>> --
>> 2.31.1
>>
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists