All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
	NFS list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	open-osd <osd-dev@open-osd.org>
Cc: Peng Tao <tao.peng@emc.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] pnfs-obj: Better IO pattern in case of unaligned offset
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:38:23 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <501A74BF.3040708@panasas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <501A7369.6090808@panasas.com>


Depending on layout and ARCH, ORE has some limits on max IO sizes
which is communicated on (what else) ore_layout->max_io_length,
which is always stripe aligned.
This was considered as the pg_test boundary for splitting and starting
a new IO.

But in the case of a long IO where the start offset is not aligned
what would happen is that both end of IO[N] and start of IO[N+1]
would be unaligned, causing each IO boundary parity unit to be
calculated and written twice.

So what we do in this patch is split the very start of an unaligned
IO, up to a stripe boundary, and then next IO's can continue fully
aligned til the end.

We might be sacrificing the case where the full unaligned IO would
fit within a single max_io_length, but the sacrifice is well worth
the elimination of double calculation and parity units IO.
Actually the sacrificing is marginal and is almost unmeasurable.

TODO:
	If we know the total expected linear segment that will
	be received, at pg_init, we could use that information
	in many places:
	1. blocks-layout get_layout write segment size
	2. Better mds-threshold
	3. In above situation for a better clean split

	I will do this in future submission.

Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
---
 fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c b/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c
index f50d3e8..ea6d111 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c
@@ -570,17 +570,66 @@ static bool objio_pg_test(struct nfs_pageio_descriptor *pgio,
 		return false;
 
 	return pgio->pg_count + req->wb_bytes <=
-			OBJIO_LSEG(pgio->pg_lseg)->layout.max_io_length;
+			(unsigned long)pgio->pg_layout_private;
+}
+
+void objio_init_read(struct nfs_pageio_descriptor *pgio, struct nfs_page *req)
+{
+	pnfs_generic_pg_init_read(pgio, req);
+	if (unlikely(pgio->pg_lseg == NULL))
+		return; /* Not pNFS */
+
+	pgio->pg_layout_private = (void *)
+				OBJIO_LSEG(pgio->pg_lseg)->layout.max_io_length;
+}
+
+static bool aligned_on_raid_stripe(u64 offset, struct ore_layout *layout,
+				   unsigned long *stripe_end)
+{
+	u32 stripe_off;
+	unsigned stripe_size;
+
+	if (layout->raid_algorithm == PNFS_OSD_RAID_0)
+		return true;
+
+	stripe_size = layout->stripe_unit *
+				(layout->group_width - layout->parity);
+
+	div_u64_rem(offset, stripe_size, &stripe_off);
+	if (!stripe_off)
+		return true;
+
+	*stripe_end = stripe_size - stripe_off;
+	return false;
+}
+
+void objio_init_write(struct nfs_pageio_descriptor *pgio, struct nfs_page *req)
+{
+	unsigned long stripe_end = 0;
+
+	pnfs_generic_pg_init_write(pgio, req);
+	if (unlikely(pgio->pg_lseg == NULL))
+		return; /* Not pNFS */
+
+	if (req->wb_offset ||
+	    !aligned_on_raid_stripe(req->wb_index * PAGE_SIZE,
+			       &OBJIO_LSEG(pgio->pg_lseg)->layout,
+			       &stripe_end)) {
+		pgio->pg_layout_private = (void *)stripe_end;
+	} else {
+		pgio->pg_layout_private = (void *)
+				OBJIO_LSEG(pgio->pg_lseg)->layout.max_io_length;
+	}
 }
 
 static const struct nfs_pageio_ops objio_pg_read_ops = {
-	.pg_init = pnfs_generic_pg_init_read,
+	.pg_init = objio_init_read,
 	.pg_test = objio_pg_test,
 	.pg_doio = pnfs_generic_pg_readpages,
 };
 
 static const struct nfs_pageio_ops objio_pg_write_ops = {
-	.pg_init = pnfs_generic_pg_init_write,
+	.pg_init = objio_init_write,
 	.pg_test = objio_pg_test,
 	.pg_doio = pnfs_generic_pg_writepages,
 };
-- 
1.7.10.2.677.gb6bc67f



  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-08-02 12:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-08-02 12:32 [PATCHSET 0/3] pnfs-obj: Fixes left-out from 3.5 for the 3.6 merge window Boaz Harrosh
2012-08-02 12:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] NFS41: add pg_layout_private to nfs_pageio_descriptor Boaz Harrosh
2012-08-02 12:36 ` [PATCH 1/3 repost] " Boaz Harrosh
2012-08-02 13:06   ` Boaz Harrosh
2012-08-02 12:38 ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
2012-08-02 12:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] pnfs: Don't BUG on info received from Server Boaz Harrosh

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=501A74BF.3040708@panasas.com \
    --to=bharrosh@panasas.com \
    --cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=osd-dev@open-osd.org \
    --cc=tao.peng@emc.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.