| 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: <20240416073806.50e3ff5d@peluse-desk5>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 07:38:06 -0700
From: Paul E Luse <paul.e.luse@...ux.intel.com>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
Cc: tada keisuke <keisuke1.tada@...xia.com>, "song@...nel.org"
<song@...nel.org>, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>,
"linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Luse, Paul
E" <paul.e.luse@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/11] md: add atomic mode switching in RAID 1/10
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:39:53 +0800
Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 在 2024/04/18 13:44, tada keisuke 写道:
> > This patch depends on patch 07.
> >
> > All rdevs running in RAID 1/10 switch nr_pending to atomic mode.
> > The value of nr_pending is read in a normal operation
> > (choose_best_rdev()). Therefore, nr_pending must always be
> > consistent.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Keisuke TADA <keisuke1.tada@...xia.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Toshifumi OHTAKE <toshifumi.ootake@...xia.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/md/md.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > drivers/md/raid1.c | 7 +++++++
> > drivers/md/raid10.c | 4 ++++
> > 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/md/md.h b/drivers/md/md.h
> > index ab09e312c9bb..57b09b567ffa 100644
> > --- a/drivers/md/md.h
> > +++ b/drivers/md/md.h
> > @@ -236,6 +236,20 @@ static inline unsigned long
> > nr_pending_read(struct md_rdev *rdev) return
> > atomic_long_read(&rdev->nr_pending.data->count); }
> >
> > +static inline bool nr_pending_is_percpu_mode(struct md_rdev *rdev)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long __percpu *percpu_count;
> > +
> > + return __ref_is_percpu(&rdev->nr_pending, &percpu_count);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline bool nr_pending_is_atomic_mode(struct md_rdev *rdev)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long __percpu *percpu_count;
> > +
> > + return !__ref_is_percpu(&rdev->nr_pending, &percpu_count);
> > +}
> > +
> > static inline int is_badblock(struct md_rdev *rdev, sector_t s,
> > int sectors, sector_t *first_bad, int *bad_sectors)
> > {
> > diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c
> > index 12318fb15a88..c38ae13aadab 100644
> > --- a/drivers/md/raid1.c
> > +++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c
> > @@ -784,6 +784,7 @@ static int choose_best_rdev(struct r1conf
> > *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio) if (ctl.readable_disks++ == 1)
> > set_bit(R1BIO_FailFast, &r1_bio->state);
> >
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(nr_pending_is_percpu_mode(rdev));
> > pending = nr_pending_read(rdev);
> > dist = abs(r1_bio->sector -
> > conf->mirrors[disk].head_position);
> > @@ -1930,6 +1931,7 @@ static int raid1_add_disk(struct mddev
> > *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev) if (err)
> > return err;
> >
> > +
> > percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync(&rdev->nr_pending);
> > raid1_add_conf(conf, rdev, mirror, false); /* As all devices are
> > equivalent, we don't need a full recovery
> > * if this was recently any drive of the
> > array @@ -1949,6 +1951,7 @@ static int raid1_add_disk(struct mddev
> > *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev) set_bit(Replacement, &rdev->flags);
> > raid1_add_conf(conf, rdev, repl_slot, true);
> > err = 0;
> > +
> > percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync(&rdev->nr_pending);
>
> I don't understand what's the point here, 'nr_pending' will be used
> when the rdev issuing IO, and it's always used as atomic mode, there
> is no difference.
>
> Consider that 'nr_pending' must be read from IO fast path, use it as
> atomic is something we must accept. Unless someone comes up with a
> plan to avoid reading 'inflight' counter from fast path like generic
> block layer, it's not ok to me to switch to percpu_ref for now.
>
> +CC Paul
>
> HI, Paul, perhaps you RR mode doesn't need such 'inflight' counter
> anymore?
>
I too am struggling to see the benefit but am curious enough that I
will run some tests on my own as I have fresh baseline RAID1 large sweep
performance data ready right now.
So my WIP round robin patch won't need nr_pedning for SSDs but I think
it will for HDD plus I need a new atomic counter for round robin for
SSDs anyway but I see no perfomrnace impact so far from adding it.
-Paul
> Thanks,
> Kuai
>
> > conf->fullsync = 1;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -3208,6 +3211,7 @@ static void raid1_free(struct mddev *mddev,
> > void *priv); static int raid1_run(struct mddev *mddev)
> > {
> > struct r1conf *conf;
> > + struct md_rdev *rdev;
> > int i;
> > int ret;
> >
> > @@ -3269,6 +3273,9 @@ static int raid1_run(struct mddev *mddev)
> > /*
> > * Ok, everything is just fine now
> > */
> > + rdev_for_each(rdev, mddev) {
> > +
> > percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync(&rdev->nr_pending);
> > + }
> > rcu_assign_pointer(mddev->thread, conf->thread);
> > rcu_assign_pointer(conf->thread, NULL);
> > mddev->private = conf;
> > diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c
> > index b91dd6c0be5a..66896a1076e1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
> > +++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
> > @@ -808,6 +808,7 @@ static struct md_rdev *read_balance(struct
> > r10conf *conf,
> > nonrot = bdev_nonrot(rdev->bdev);
> > has_nonrot_disk |= nonrot;
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(nr_pending_is_percpu_mode(rdev));
> > pending = nr_pending_read(rdev);
> > if (min_pending > pending && nonrot) {
> > min_pending = pending;
> > @@ -2113,6 +2114,7 @@ static int raid10_add_disk(struct mddev
> > *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev) p->recovery_disabled =
> > mddev->recovery_disabled - 1; rdev->raid_disk = mirror;
> > err = 0;
> > +
> > percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync(&rdev->nr_pending); if
> > (rdev->saved_raid_disk != mirror) conf->fullsync = 1;
> > WRITE_ONCE(p->rdev, rdev);
> > @@ -2127,6 +2129,7 @@ static int raid10_add_disk(struct mddev
> > *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev) err = mddev_stack_new_rdev(mddev,
> > rdev); if (err)
> > return err;
> > +
> > percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync(&rdev->nr_pending); conf->fullsync
> > = 1; WRITE_ONCE(p->replacement, rdev);
> > }
> > @@ -4028,6 +4031,7 @@ static int raid10_run(struct mddev *mddev)
> > rdev_for_each(rdev, mddev) {
> > long long diff;
> >
> > +
> > percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync(&rdev->nr_pending); disk_idx =
> > rdev->raid_disk; if (disk_idx < 0)
> > continue;
> >
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists