From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Kundan Kumar <kundan.kumar@samsung.com>
Cc: jaegeuk@kernel.org, chao@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, miklos@szeredi.hu,
agruenba@redhat.com, trondmy@kernel.org, anna@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, willy@infradead.org,
mcgrof@kernel.org, clm@meta.com, david@fromorbit.com,
amir73il@gmail.com, axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de,
ritesh.list@gmail.com, djwong@kernel.org, dave@stgolabs.net,
p.raghav@samsung.com, da.gomez@samsung.com,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, gfs2@lists.linux.dev,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
gost.dev@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Parallelizing filesystem writeback
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2025 16:19:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250602141904.GA21996@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250529111504.89912-1-kundan.kumar@samsung.com>
On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 04:44:51PM +0530, Kundan Kumar wrote:
> Number of writeback contexts
> ===========================
> The plan is to keep the nr_wb_ctx as 1, ensuring default single threaded
> behavior. However, we set the number of writeback contexts equal to
> number of CPUs in the current version. Later we will make it configurable
> using a mount option, allowing filesystems to choose the optimal number
> of writeback contexts.
Well, the proper thing would be to figure out a good default and not
just keep things as-is, no?
> IOPS and throughput
> ===================
> We see significant improvement in IOPS across several filesystem on both
> PMEM and NVMe devices.
>
> Performance gains:
> - On PMEM:
> Base XFS : 544 MiB/s
> Parallel Writeback XFS : 1015 MiB/s (+86%)
> Base EXT4 : 536 MiB/s
> Parallel Writeback EXT4 : 1047 MiB/s (+95%)
>
> - On NVMe:
> Base XFS : 651 MiB/s
> Parallel Writeback XFS : 808 MiB/s (+24%)
> Base EXT4 : 494 MiB/s
> Parallel Writeback EXT4 : 797 MiB/s (+61%)
What worksload was this?
How many CPU cores did the system have, how many AGs/BGs did the file
systems have? What SSD/Pmem was this? Did this change the write
amp as measure by the media writes on the NVMe SSD?
Also I'd be really curious to see numbers on hard drives.
> We also see that there is no increase in filesystem fragmentation
> # of extents:
> - On XFS (on PMEM):
> Base XFS : 1964
> Parallel Writeback XFS : 1384
>
> - On EXT4 (on PMEM):
> Base EXT4 : 21
> Parallel Writeback EXT4 : 11
How were the number of extents counts given that they look so wildly
different?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Kundan Kumar <kundan.kumar@samsung.com>
Cc: ritesh.list@gmail.com, jack@suse.cz, djwong@kernel.org,
amir73il@gmail.com, david@fromorbit.com, gfs2@lists.linux.dev,
linux-mm@kvack.org, clm@meta.com, hch@lst.de, dave@stgolabs.net,
agruenba@redhat.com, miklos@szeredi.hu, gost.dev@samsung.com,
willy@infradead.org, p.raghav@samsung.com,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, da.gomez@samsung.com,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jaegeuk@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk,
brauner@kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
mcgrof@kernel.org, anna@kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
trondmy@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 00/13] Parallelizing filesystem writeback
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2025 16:19:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250602141904.GA21996@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250529111504.89912-1-kundan.kumar@samsung.com>
On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 04:44:51PM +0530, Kundan Kumar wrote:
> Number of writeback contexts
> ===========================
> The plan is to keep the nr_wb_ctx as 1, ensuring default single threaded
> behavior. However, we set the number of writeback contexts equal to
> number of CPUs in the current version. Later we will make it configurable
> using a mount option, allowing filesystems to choose the optimal number
> of writeback contexts.
Well, the proper thing would be to figure out a good default and not
just keep things as-is, no?
> IOPS and throughput
> ===================
> We see significant improvement in IOPS across several filesystem on both
> PMEM and NVMe devices.
>
> Performance gains:
> - On PMEM:
> Base XFS : 544 MiB/s
> Parallel Writeback XFS : 1015 MiB/s (+86%)
> Base EXT4 : 536 MiB/s
> Parallel Writeback EXT4 : 1047 MiB/s (+95%)
>
> - On NVMe:
> Base XFS : 651 MiB/s
> Parallel Writeback XFS : 808 MiB/s (+24%)
> Base EXT4 : 494 MiB/s
> Parallel Writeback EXT4 : 797 MiB/s (+61%)
What worksload was this?
How many CPU cores did the system have, how many AGs/BGs did the file
systems have? What SSD/Pmem was this? Did this change the write
amp as measure by the media writes on the NVMe SSD?
Also I'd be really curious to see numbers on hard drives.
> We also see that there is no increase in filesystem fragmentation
> # of extents:
> - On XFS (on PMEM):
> Base XFS : 1964
> Parallel Writeback XFS : 1384
>
> - On EXT4 (on PMEM):
> Base EXT4 : 21
> Parallel Writeback EXT4 : 11
How were the number of extents counts given that they look so wildly
different?
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-02 14:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 80+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20250529113215epcas5p2edd67e7b129621f386be005fdba53378@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [PATCH 00/13] Parallelizing filesystem writeback Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [PATCH 01/13] writeback: add infra for parallel writeback Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [PATCH 02/13] writeback: add support to initialize and free multiple writeback ctxs Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [PATCH 03/13] writeback: link bdi_writeback to its corresponding bdi_writeback_ctx Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [PATCH 04/13] writeback: affine inode to a writeback ctx within a bdi Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-06-02 14:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-02 14:24 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [PATCH 05/13] writeback: modify bdi_writeback search logic to search across all wb ctxs Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [PATCH 06/13] writeback: invoke all writeback contexts for flusher and dirtytime writeback Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [PATCH 07/13] writeback: modify sync related functions to iterate over all writeback contexts Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [PATCH 08/13] writeback: add support to collect stats for all writeback ctxs Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [PATCH 09/13] f2fs: add support in f2fs to handle multiple writeback contexts Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-06-02 14:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-02 14:20 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [PATCH 10/13] fuse: add support for multiple writeback contexts in fuse Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-06-02 14:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-02 14:21 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-02 15:50 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-06-02 15:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Bernd Schubert
2025-06-02 15:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-02 15:55 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [PATCH 11/13] gfs2: add support in gfs2 to handle multiple writeback contexts Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [PATCH 12/13] nfs: add support in nfs " Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-06-02 14:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-02 14:22 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [PATCH 13/13] writeback: set the num of writeback contexts to number of online cpus Kundan Kumar
2025-05-29 11:15 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-06-03 14:36 ` kernel test robot
2025-06-03 14:36 ` [f2fs-dev] " kernel test robot
2025-05-30 3:37 ` [PATCH 00/13] Parallelizing filesystem writeback Andrew Morton
2025-05-30 3:37 ` [f2fs-dev] " Andrew Morton
2025-06-25 15:44 ` Kundan Kumar
2025-06-25 15:44 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-07-02 18:43 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-07-02 18:43 ` [f2fs-dev] " Darrick J. Wong via Linux-f2fs-devel
2025-07-03 13:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-03 13:05 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-04 7:02 ` Kundan Kumar
2025-07-04 7:02 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-07-07 14:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-07 14:28 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-07 15:47 ` Jan Kara
2025-07-07 15:47 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2025-06-02 14:19 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2025-06-02 14:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-03 9:16 ` Anuj Gupta/Anuj Gupta
2025-06-03 9:16 ` [f2fs-dev] " Anuj Gupta/Anuj Gupta
2025-06-03 13:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-03 13:24 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-03 13:52 ` Anuj gupta
2025-06-03 13:52 ` [f2fs-dev] " Anuj gupta
2025-06-03 14:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-03 14:04 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-03 14:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-03 14:05 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-06 5:04 ` Kundan Kumar
2025-06-06 5:04 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-06-09 4:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-09 4:00 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-04 9:22 ` Kundan Kumar
2025-06-04 9:22 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-06-11 15:51 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-06-11 15:51 ` [f2fs-dev] " Darrick J. Wong via Linux-f2fs-devel
2025-06-24 5:59 ` Kundan Kumar
2025-06-24 5:59 ` [f2fs-dev] " Kundan Kumar
2025-07-02 18:44 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-07-02 18:44 ` [f2fs-dev] " Darrick J. Wong via Linux-f2fs-devel
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=20250602141904.GA21996@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=agruenba@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=anna@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=chao@kernel.org \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=da.gomez@samsung.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=gfs2@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=gost.dev@samsung.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=kundan.kumar@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=p.raghav@samsung.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=trondmy@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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.