From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Anderson <andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alasdair Graeme Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optimize lock in queue unplugging
Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 21:11:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080504191132.GQ12774@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804300944440.23408@engineering.redhat.com>
On Wed, Apr 30 2008, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Apr 29 2008, Mike Anderson wrote:
> >>Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Apr 29 2008, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >>>>Hi
> >>>>
> >>>>Mike Anderson was doing an OLTP benchmark on a computer with 48 physical
> >>>>disks mapped to one logical device via device mapper.
> >>>>
> >>>>He found that there was a slowdown on request_queue->lock in function
> >>>>generic_unplug_device. The slowdown is caused by the fact that when some
> >>>>code calls unplug on the device mapper, device mapper calls unplug on
> >>>>all
> >>>>physical disks. These unplug calls take the lock, find that the queue is
> >>>>already unplugged, release the lock and exit.
> >>>>
> >>>>With the below patch, performance of the benchmark was increased by 18%
> >>>>(the whole OLTP application, not just block layer microbenchmarks).
> >>>>
> >>>>So I'm submitting this patch for upstream. I think the patch is correct,
> >>>>because when more threads call simultaneously plug and unplug, it is
> >>>>unspecified, if the queue is or isn't plugged (so the patch can't make
> >>>>this worse). And the caller that plugged the queue should unplug it
> >>>>anyway. (if it doesn't, there's 3ms timeout).
> >>>
> >>>Where were these unplug calls coming from? The block layer will
> >>>generally only unplug when it is already unplugged, so if you are seeing
> >>>so many unplug calls that the patch redues overhead by as much
> >>>described, perhaps the callsite is buggy?
> >>
> >>I do not have direct access the the benchmark setup, but here is the data
> >>I have received.
> >>
> >>The oprofile data was showing ll_rw_blk::generic_unplug_device() as a top
> >>routine at 13% of the samples. Annotation of the samples shows hits on
> >>spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock).
> >>
> >>Here are some sample call traces:
> >>
> >>Call trace #1
> >>
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff80058c6c>] generic_unplug_device+0x5d/0xc6
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8820ea3e>] :dm_mod:dm_table_unplug_all+0x33/0x41
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8820cc85>] :dm_mod:dm_unplug_all+0x1d/0x28
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8005a78a>] blk_backing_dev_unplug+0x56/0x5b
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff80014cdc>] sync_buffer+0x36/0x3f
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff800629a4>] __wait_on_bit+0x40/0x6f
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff80014ca6>] sync_buffer+0x0/0x3f
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff80062a3f>] out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x6c/0x78
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8009c474>] wake_bit_function+0x0/0x23
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff88034c85>] :jbd:journal_commit_transaction+0x91f/0x1086
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8003d038>] lock_timer_base+0x1b/0x3c
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8803840e>] :jbd:kjournald+0xc1/0x213
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8009c446>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2e
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8009c283>] keventd_create_kthread+0x0/0x61
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8803834d>] :jbd:kjournald+0x0/0x213
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8009c283>] keventd_create_kthread+0x0/0x61
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff800321d5>] kthread+0xfe/0x132
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8005cfb1>] child_rip+0xa/0x11
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8009c283>] keventd_create_kthread+0x0/0x61
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff800320d7>] kthread+0x0/0x132
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8005cfa7>] child_rip+0x0/0x11
> >>
> >>Call trace #2
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff80058c6c>] generic_unplug_device+0x5d/0xc6
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8820ea3e>] :dm_mod:dm_table_unplug_all+0x33/0x41
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8820cc85>] :dm_mod:dm_unplug_all+0x1d/0x28
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8005a78a>] blk_backing_dev_unplug+0x56/0x5b
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff800e8bfe>] __blockdev_direct_IO+0x889/0xaa2
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff88050800>] :ext3:ext3_direct_IO+0xf3/0x18b
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8804ec84>] :ext3:ext3_get_block+0x0/0xe3
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff800be6bb>] generic_file_direct_IO+0xbd/0xfb
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8001e637>] generic_file_direct_write+0x60/0xf2
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff80015cfd>] __generic_file_aio_write_nolock+0x2b7/0x3b8
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8002134f>] generic_file_aio_write+0x65/0xc1
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8804c192>] :ext3:ext3_file_write+0x16/0x91
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff80017944>] do_sync_write+0xc7/0x104
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8009c446>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2e
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff80111400>] free_msg+0x22/0x3c
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff800161c4>] vfs_write+0xce/0x174
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8004194c>] sys_pwrite64+0x50/0x70
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8005cde9>] error_exit+0x0/0x84
> >>kernel: [<ffffffff8005c116>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
> >
> >So it's basically dm calling into blk_unplug() all the time, which
> >doesn't check if the queue is plugged. The reason why I didn't like the
> >initial patch is that ->unplug_fn() really should not be called unless
> >the queue IS plugged. So how about this instead:
> >
> >http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-2.6-block.git;a=commit;h=c44993018887e82abd49023e92e8d8b6000e03ed
> >
> >That's a lot more appropriate, imho.
> >
> >--
> >Jens Axboe
>
> This doesn't seem correct to me. The difference between blk_unplug and
> generic_unplug_device is that blk_unplug is called on every type of device
> and generic_unplug_device (pointed to by q->unplug_fn) is a method that is
> called on low-level disk devices.
>
> dm and md redefine q->unplug_fn to point to their own method. On dm and
> md, blk_unplug is called, but generic_unplug_device is not.
>
> So if you have this setup
> dm-linear(unplugged) -> disk(plugged)
>
> then, with your patch, a call to blk_unplug(dm-linear) will not unplug the
> disk. With my patch, a call to blk_unplug(dm-linear) will unplug the disk
> --- it calls q->unplug_fn that points to dm_unplug_all, that calls
> blk_unplug again on the disk and that calls generic_unplug_device on disk
> queue.
That is because the md/dm don't set the plugged flag which I think they
should. So we fix that instead so that plugging works the same from the
block core or from a driver instead of adding work-arounds in the block
unplug handler. Adding a check for plugged in the plug handler is a
hack, I don't see how you can argue against that.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-04 19:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-29 19:12 [PATCH] Optimize lock in queue unplugging Mikulas Patocka
2008-04-29 19:25 ` Jens Axboe
2008-04-29 20:02 ` Mikulas Patocka
2008-04-29 20:05 ` Jens Axboe
2008-04-29 20:29 ` Mike Anderson
2008-04-30 7:14 ` Jens Axboe
2008-04-30 10:38 ` Alasdair G Kergon
2008-04-30 13:54 ` Mikulas Patocka
2008-05-04 19:11 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2008-05-05 4:01 ` Mikulas Patocka
2008-05-07 7:45 ` Jens Axboe
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=20080504191132.GQ12774@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpatocka@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.