From: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH] GFS2: aggressively issue revokes in gfs2_log_flush
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 10:10:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1371028217.2712.2.camel@menhir> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130611144931.GL1913@ether.msp.redhat.com>
Hi,
On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 09:49 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote:
> This patch looks at all the outstanding blocks in all the transactions
> on the log, and moves the completed ones to the ail2 list. Then it
> issues revokes for these blocks. This will hopefully speed things up
> in situations where there is a lot of contention for glocks, especially
> if they are acquired serially.
>
> revoke_lo_before_commit will issue at most one log block's full of these
> preemptive revokes. The amount of reserved log space that
> gfs2_log_reserve() ignores has been incremented to allow for this extra
> block.
>
Looks good, just a couple of comments...
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Marzinski <bmarzins@redhat.com>
> ---
> fs/gfs2/log.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> fs/gfs2/log.h | 1
> fs/gfs2/lops.c | 1
> 3 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Index: gfs2-3.0-nmw-130611/fs/gfs2/log.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gfs2-3.0-nmw-130611.orig/fs/gfs2/log.c
> +++ gfs2-3.0-nmw-130611/fs/gfs2/log.c
> @@ -211,15 +211,16 @@ static void gfs2_ail1_empty_one(struct g
> static int gfs2_ail1_empty(struct gfs2_sbd *sdp)
> {
> struct gfs2_trans *tr, *s;
> + int oldest_tr = 1;
> int ret;
>
> spin_lock(&sdp->sd_ail_lock);
> list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(tr, s, &sdp->sd_ail1_list, tr_list) {
> gfs2_ail1_empty_one(sdp, tr);
> - if (list_empty(&tr->tr_ail1_list))
> + if (list_empty(&tr->tr_ail1_list) && oldest_tr)
> list_move(&tr->tr_list, &sdp->sd_ail2_list);
> else
> - break;
> + oldest_tr = 0;
> }
> ret = list_empty(&sdp->sd_ail1_list);
> spin_unlock(&sdp->sd_ail_lock);
> @@ -317,7 +318,7 @@ static void ail2_empty(struct gfs2_sbd *
>
> int gfs2_log_reserve(struct gfs2_sbd *sdp, unsigned int blks)
> {
> - unsigned reserved_blks = 6 * (4096 / sdp->sd_vfs->s_blocksize);
> + unsigned reserved_blks = 7 * (4096 / sdp->sd_vfs->s_blocksize);
> unsigned wanted = blks + reserved_blks;
> DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> int did_wait = 0;
> @@ -545,6 +546,72 @@ void gfs2_ordered_del_inode(struct gfs2_
> spin_unlock(&sdp->sd_ordered_lock);
> }
>
> +void write_revokes(struct gfs2_sbd *sdp)
> +{
Since this is not static, it should really be called gfs2_write_revokes
> + struct gfs2_trans *tr;
> + struct gfs2_bufdata *bd, *tmp;
> + struct buffer_head *bh;
> + struct gfs2_glock *gl;
> + int have_revokes = 0;
> + int max_revokes = (sdp->sd_sb.sb_bsize - sizeof(struct gfs2_log_descriptor)) / sizeof(u64);
> +
> + gfs2_ail1_empty(sdp);
> + spin_lock(&sdp->sd_ail_lock);
> + list_for_each_entry(tr, &sdp->sd_ail1_list, tr_list) {
> + list_for_each_entry(bd, &tr->tr_ail2_list, bd_ail_st_list) {
> + if (list_empty(&bd->bd_list)) {
> + have_revokes = 1;
> + goto done;
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +done:
> + spin_unlock(&sdp->sd_ail_lock);
> + if (have_revokes == 0)
> + return;
> + while (sdp->sd_log_num_revoke > max_revokes)
> + max_revokes += (sdp->sd_sb.sb_bsize - sizeof(struct gfs2_meta_header)) / sizeof(u64);
> + max_revokes -= sdp->sd_log_num_revoke;
> + if (!sdp->sd_log_num_revoke) {
> + atomic_dec(&sdp->sd_log_blks_free);
> + /* If no blocks have been reserved, we need to also
> + * reserve a block for the header */
> + if (!sdp->sd_log_blks_reserved)
> + atomic_dec(&sdp->sd_log_blks_free);
> + }
> + gfs2_log_lock(sdp);
> + spin_lock(&sdp->sd_ail_lock);
> + list_for_each_entry(tr, &sdp->sd_ail1_list, tr_list) {
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(bd, tmp, &tr->tr_ail2_list, bd_ail_st_list) {
> + if (max_revokes == 0)
> + goto out_of_blocks;
> + if (!list_empty(&bd->bd_list))
> + continue;
> + gl = bd->bd_gl;
> + bh = bd->bd_bh;
> + bd->bd_blkno = bh->b_blocknr;
> + bh->b_private = NULL;
> + gfs2_remove_from_ail(bd);
> + bd->bd_bh = NULL;
> + bd->bd_ops = &gfs2_revoke_lops;
> + sdp->sd_log_num_revoke++;
> + atomic_inc(&gl->gl_revokes);
> + set_bit(GLF_LFLUSH, &gl->gl_flags);
> + list_add_tail(&bd->bd_list, &sdp->sd_log_le_revoke);
This looks very similar to code elsewhere which creates revokes - is it
possible to make this bit into a common function perhaps?
Otherwise I think it looks very good,
Steve.
> + max_revokes--;
> + }
> + }
> +out_of_blocks:
> + spin_unlock(&sdp->sd_ail_lock);
> + gfs2_log_unlock(sdp);
> +
> + if (!sdp->sd_log_num_revoke) {
> + atomic_inc(&sdp->sd_log_blks_free);
> + if (!sdp->sd_log_blks_reserved)
> + atomic_inc(&sdp->sd_log_blks_free);
> + }
> +}
> +
> /**
> * log_write_header - Get and initialize a journal header buffer
> * @sdp: The GFS2 superblock
> @@ -562,7 +629,6 @@ static void log_write_header(struct gfs2
> lh = page_address(page);
> clear_page(lh);
>
> - gfs2_ail1_empty(sdp);
> tail = current_tail(sdp);
>
> lh->lh_header.mh_magic = cpu_to_be32(GFS2_MAGIC);
> Index: gfs2-3.0-nmw-130611/fs/gfs2/log.h
> ===================================================================
> --- gfs2-3.0-nmw-130611.orig/fs/gfs2/log.h
> +++ gfs2-3.0-nmw-130611/fs/gfs2/log.h
> @@ -72,5 +72,6 @@ extern void gfs2_ail1_flush(struct gfs2_
> extern void gfs2_log_shutdown(struct gfs2_sbd *sdp);
> extern void gfs2_meta_syncfs(struct gfs2_sbd *sdp);
> extern int gfs2_logd(void *data);
> +extern void write_revokes(struct gfs2_sbd *sdp);
>
> #endif /* __LOG_DOT_H__ */
> Index: gfs2-3.0-nmw-130611/fs/gfs2/lops.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gfs2-3.0-nmw-130611.orig/fs/gfs2/lops.c
> +++ gfs2-3.0-nmw-130611/fs/gfs2/lops.c
> @@ -606,6 +606,7 @@ static void revoke_lo_before_commit(stru
> struct page *page;
> unsigned int length;
>
> + write_revokes(sdp);
> if (!sdp->sd_log_num_revoke)
> return;
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-12 9:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-11 14:49 [Cluster-devel] [PATCH] GFS2: aggressively issue revokes in gfs2_log_flush Benjamin Marzinski
2013-06-12 9:10 ` Steven Whitehouse [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1371028217.2712.2.camel@menhir \
--to=swhiteho@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.