From: tytso@mit.edu
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Mingming Cao <cmm@us.ibm.com>,
keith maanthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: ext4 dbench performance with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:10:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100408211054.GB1849@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1270759317.3373.7.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 01:41:57PM -0700, john stultz wrote:
>
> I'll continue to play with your patch and see if I can con some some
> folks with more interesting storage setups to do some testing as well.
You might want to ask djwong to play with it with his nice big
machine. (We don't need a big file system, but we want as many CPU's
as possible, and to use his "mailserver" workload to really stress the
journal. I'd recommend using barrier=0 for additional journal
lock-level stress testing, and then try some forced sysrq-b reboots
and then make sure that the filesystem is consistent after the journal
replay.)
I've since done basic two-CPU testing using xfstests under KVM, but
that's really not going to test any locking issues.
> Any thoughts for ways to rework the state_lock in start_this_handle?
> (Now that its at the top of the contention logs? :)
That's going to be much harder. We're going to have to take
j_state_lock at some point inside start_this_handle. We might be able
to decrease the amount of code which is run while the spinlock is
taken, but I very much doubt it's possible to eliminate that spinlock
entirely.
Do you have detailed lockstat information showing the hold-time and
wait-time of j_lock_stat (especially in start_this_handle)?
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-08 21:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-07 23:21 ext4 dbench performance with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT john stultz
2010-04-08 3:46 ` tytso
2010-04-08 10:18 ` Theodore Tso
2010-04-08 20:41 ` john stultz
2010-04-08 21:10 ` tytso [this message]
2010-04-13 3:52 ` john stultz
2010-04-14 3:04 ` john stultz
2010-04-08 22:37 ` Mingming Cao
2010-04-12 19:46 ` Jan Kara
2010-04-13 14:52 ` tytso
2010-04-13 16:25 ` Darren Hart
2010-06-02 22:35 ` j_state_lock patch data (was: Re: ext4 dbench performance with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) Eric Whitney
2010-04-09 15:49 ` ext4 dbench performance with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT Andi Kleen
2010-04-09 23:33 ` tytso
2010-04-09 23:48 ` Chen, Tim C
2010-04-09 23:57 ` john stultz
2010-04-10 11:58 ` tytso
2010-04-12 19:54 ` Chen, Tim C
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=20100408211054.GB1849@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kmannth@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.