From: Bill Fink <billfink@mindspring.com>
To: tytso@mit.edu, adilger@sun.com
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, bill.fink@nasa.gov, billfink@mindspring.com
Subject: [RFC PATCH] ext4: fix 50% disk write performance regression
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 23:11:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100829231126.8d8b2086.billfink@mindspring.com> (raw)
A 50% ext4 disk write performance regression was introduced
in 2.6.32 and still exists in 2.6.35, although somewhat improved
from 2.6.32. Read performance was not affected).
2.6.31 disk write performance (RAID5 with 8 disks):
i7test7% dd if=/dev/zero of=/i7raid/bill/testfile1 bs=1M count=32768
32768+0 records in
32768+0 records out
34359738368 bytes (34 GB) copied, 49.7106 s, 691 MB/s
2.6.32 disk write performance (RAID5 with 8 disks):
i7test7% dd if=/dev/zero of=/i7raid/bill/testfile1 bs=1M count=32768
32768+0 records in
32768+0 records out
34359738368 bytes (34 GB) copied, 100.395 s, 342 MB/s
2.6.35 disk write performance (RAID5 with 8 disks):
i7test7% dd if=/dev/zero of=/i7raid/bill/testfile1 bs=1M count=32768
32768+0 records in
32768+0 records out
34359738368 bytes (34 GB) copied, 75.7265 s, 454 MB/s
A git bisect targetted commit 55138e0bc29c0751e2152df9ad35deea542f29b3
(ext4: Adjust ext4_da_writepages() to write out larger contiguous chunks).
Specifically the performance issue is caused by the use of the function
ext4_num_dirty_pages.
The included patch avoids calling ext4_num_dirty_pages
(and removes its definition) by unconditionally setting
desired_nr_to_write to wbc->nr_to_write * 8.
With the patch, the disk write performance is back to
approximately 2.6.31 performance levels.
2.6.35+patch disk write performance (RAID5 with 8 disks):
i7test7% dd if=/dev/zero of=/i7raid/bill/testfile1 bs=1M count=32768
32768+0 records in
32768+0 records out
34359738368 bytes (34 GB) copied, 50.7234 s, 677 MB/s
Since I'm no expert in this area, I'm submitting this
RFC patch against 2.6.35. I'm not sure what all the
ramifications of my suggested change would be. However,
to my admittedly novice eyes, it doesn't seem to be an
unreasonable change. Also, subjectively from building
kernels on a RAID5 ext4 filesystem using the patched
2.6.35 kernel (via make -j 8), I didn't notice any issues,
and it actually seemed more responsive than when using
the unpatched 2.6.35 kernel.
-Bill
P.S. I am not subscribed to the linux-ext4 e-mail list,
plus this is my very first attempted linux kernel
patch submission.
Partially revert 55138e0bc29c0751e2152df9ad35deea542f29b3
(ext4: Adjust ext4_da_writepages() to write out larger contiguous chunks)
to fix a 50% ext4 disk write performance regression introduced
between 2.6.31 and 2.6.32.
Signed-off-by: Bill Fink <bill.fink@nasa.gov>
diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
index 42272d6..f6e639b 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
@@ -1143,64 +1143,6 @@ static int check_block_validity(struct inode *inode, const char *func,
}
/*
- * Return the number of contiguous dirty pages in a given inode
- * starting at page frame idx.
- */
-static pgoff_t ext4_num_dirty_pages(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t idx,
- unsigned int max_pages)
-{
- struct address_space *mapping = inode->i_mapping;
- pgoff_t index;
- struct pagevec pvec;
- pgoff_t num = 0;
- int i, nr_pages, done = 0;
-
- if (max_pages == 0)
- return 0;
- pagevec_init(&pvec, 0);
- while (!done) {
- index = idx;
- nr_pages = pagevec_lookup_tag(&pvec, mapping, &index,
- PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY,
- (pgoff_t)PAGEVEC_SIZE);
- if (nr_pages == 0)
- break;
- for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) {
- struct page *page = pvec.pages[i];
- struct buffer_head *bh, *head;
-
- lock_page(page);
- if (unlikely(page->mapping != mapping) ||
- !PageDirty(page) ||
- PageWriteback(page) ||
- page->index != idx) {
- done = 1;
- unlock_page(page);
- break;
- }
- if (page_has_buffers(page)) {
- bh = head = page_buffers(page);
- do {
- if (!buffer_delay(bh) &&
- !buffer_unwritten(bh))
- done = 1;
- bh = bh->b_this_page;
- } while (!done && (bh != head));
- }
- unlock_page(page);
- if (done)
- break;
- idx++;
- num++;
- if (num >= max_pages)
- break;
- }
- pagevec_release(&pvec);
- }
- return num;
-}
next reply other threads:[~2010-08-30 3:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-30 3:11 Bill Fink [this message]
2010-08-30 17:05 ` [RFC PATCH] ext4: fix 50% disk write performance regression Eric Sandeen
2010-08-30 19:30 ` Bill Fink
2010-08-30 19:35 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-08-30 17:40 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-08-30 20:49 ` Bill Fink
2010-08-30 21:05 ` Eric Sandeen
[not found] ` <20100830194533.6d09c38b.bill@wizard.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov>
2010-08-30 23:53 ` Eric Sandeen
[not found] ` <20100830210541.8b248a14.billfink@mindspring.com>
[not found] ` <4C7C62E9.4090707@redhat.com>
2010-08-31 3:27 ` Bill Fink
2010-08-31 3:29 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-08-31 0:37 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-08-31 0:51 ` Justin Maggard
2010-08-31 1:44 ` Bill Fink
2010-08-31 1:14 ` Bill Fink
2010-08-31 3:43 ` [PATCH] " Eric Sandeen
2010-08-31 4:26 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-08-31 4:53 ` Bill Fink
2010-08-31 5:05 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-08-31 5:31 ` Bill Fink
2010-09-09 0:23 ` Daniel Taylor
2010-09-09 3:29 ` Eric Sandeen
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=20100829231126.8d8b2086.billfink@mindspring.com \
--to=billfink@mindspring.com \
--cc=adilger@sun.com \
--cc=bill.fink@nasa.gov \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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.