From: He YunLei <heyunlei@huawei.com>
To: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@samsung.com>
Cc: 'Jaegeuk Kim' <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] f2fs: enhance multithread dio write performance
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 08:39:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55FA0BDB.5090104@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000a01d0f068$c46012c0$4d203840$@samsung.com>
On 2015/9/16 18:15, Chao Yu wrote:
> Hi Jaegeuk,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaegeuk@kernel.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 5:21 AM
>> To: Chao Yu
>> Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] f2fs: enhance multithread dio write performance
>>
>> Hi Chao,
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 02:41:53PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>>> When dio writes perform concurrently, our performace will be low because of
>>> Thread A's allocation of multi continuous blocks will be break by Thread B,
>>> there are two cases as below:
>>> - In Thread B, we may change current segment to a new segment for LFS
>>> allocation if we dio write in the beginning of the file.
>>> - In Thread B, we may allocate blocks in the middle of Thread A's
>>> allocation, which make blocks which allocated in Thread A being
>>> discontinuous.
>>>
>>> This patch adds writepages mutex lock to make block allocation in dio write
>>> atomic to avoid above issues.
>>>
>>> Test environment:
>>> ubuntu os with linux kernel 4.2+, intel i7-3770, 16g memory,
>>> 32g kingston sd card.
>>>
>>> fio --name seqw --ioengine=sync --invalidate=1 --rw=write --directory=/mnt/f2fs
>> --filesize=256m --size=16m --bs=2m --direct=1
>>> --numjobs=10
>>>
>>> before:
>>> WRITE: io=163840KB, aggrb=3145KB/s, minb=314KB/s, maxb=411KB/s, mint=39836msec,
>> maxt=52083msec
>>>
>>> patched:
>>> WRITE: io=163840KB, aggrb=10033KB/s, minb=1003KB/s, maxb=1124KB/s, mint=14565msec,
>> maxt=16329msec
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>> fs/f2fs/data.c | 13 ++++++++++---
>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> index a737ca5..a0a5849 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> @@ -1536,7 +1536,9 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,
>>> struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp;
>>> struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
>>> struct inode *inode = mapping->host;
>>> + struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
>>> size_t count = iov_iter_count(iter);
>>> + int rw = iov_iter_rw(iter);
>>> int err;
>>>
>>> /* we don't need to use inline_data strictly */
>>> @@ -1555,12 +1557,17 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter
>> *iter,
>>>
>>> trace_f2fs_direct_IO_enter(inode, offset, count, iov_iter_rw(iter));
>>>
>>> - if (iov_iter_rw(iter) == WRITE)
>>> + if (rw == WRITE) {
>>> + mutex_lock(&sbi->writepages);
>>
>> Why do we have to share sbi->writepages?
>
> The root cause of this issue is that: in f2fs, we have no suitable
> dispatcher which can do the following things as an atomic operation:
> a) allocate position(s) in flash device for current block(s);
> b) submit user data in allocated position(s) in block layer.
>
> Without the dispatcher, we will suffer performance issue in following
> scenario:
> Thread A Thread B Thread C
> allocate pos+1
> allocate pos+2
> allocate pos+3
> submit pos+1
> submit pos+3
> submit pos+2
>
> Our final submitting series will: pos+1, pos+3, pos+2, this makes f2fs
> running into non-LFS mode, therefore resulting in bad performance.
>
> writepages mutex lock supply us with a good solution for above issue.
> It not only make the allocating and submitting pair executing atomically,
> but also reduce the fragmentation for one file since we submit blocks
> belong to single inode as continuous as possible.
>
> So here I choose to use writepages mutex lock to fix the performance
> issue caused by both dio write vs dio write and dio write vs buffered
> write.
>
> If I'm missing something, please correct me.
>
>>
>>> __allocate_data_blocks(inode, offset, count);
>>
>> If the problem lies on the misaligned blocks, how about calling mutex_unlock
>> here?
>
> When changing to unlock here, I got regression when testing with following command:
> fio --name seqw --ioengine=sync --invalidate=1 --rw=write --directory=/mnt/f2fs --filesize=256m --size=4m --bs=64k --direct=1
> --numjobs=20
>
> unlock here:
> WRITE: io=81920KB, aggrb=5802KB/s, minb=290KB/s, maxb=292KB/s, mint=14010msec, maxt=14119msec
> unlock after dio finished:
> WRITE: io=81920KB, aggrb=6088KB/s, minb=304KB/s, maxb=1081KB/s, mint=3786msec, maxt=13454msec
>
> So how about keep it in original place in this patch?
Does share writepages mutex lock have an effect on cache write? Here is AndroBench result on my phone:
Before patch:
1R1W 8R8W 16R16W
Sequential Write 161.31 163.85 154.67
Random Write 9.48 17.66 18.09
After patch:
1R1W 8R8W 16R16W
Sequential Write 159.61 157.24 160.11
Random Write 9.17 8.51 8.8
Unit:Mb/s, File size: 64M, Buffer size: 4k
>
> Thanks,
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>> + }
>>>
>>> err = blockdev_direct_IO(iocb, inode, iter, offset, get_data_block_dio);
>>> - if (err < 0 && iov_iter_rw(iter) == WRITE)
>>> - f2fs_write_failed(mapping, offset + count);
>>> + if (rw == WRITE) {
>>> + mutex_unlock(&sbi->writepages);
>>> + if (err)
>>> + f2fs_write_failed(mapping, offset + count);
>>> + }
>>>
>>> trace_f2fs_direct_IO_exit(inode, offset, count, iov_iter_rw(iter), err);
>>>
>>> --
>>> 2.4.2
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
>
> .
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: He YunLei <heyunlei@huawei.com>
To: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@samsung.com>
Cc: "'Jaegeuk Kim'" <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 5/7] f2fs: enhance multithread dio write performance
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 08:39:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55FA0BDB.5090104@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000a01d0f068$c46012c0$4d203840$@samsung.com>
On 2015/9/16 18:15, Chao Yu wrote:
> Hi Jaegeuk,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaegeuk@kernel.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 5:21 AM
>> To: Chao Yu
>> Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] f2fs: enhance multithread dio write performance
>>
>> Hi Chao,
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 02:41:53PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>>> When dio writes perform concurrently, our performace will be low because of
>>> Thread A's allocation of multi continuous blocks will be break by Thread B,
>>> there are two cases as below:
>>> - In Thread B, we may change current segment to a new segment for LFS
>>> allocation if we dio write in the beginning of the file.
>>> - In Thread B, we may allocate blocks in the middle of Thread A's
>>> allocation, which make blocks which allocated in Thread A being
>>> discontinuous.
>>>
>>> This patch adds writepages mutex lock to make block allocation in dio write
>>> atomic to avoid above issues.
>>>
>>> Test environment:
>>> ubuntu os with linux kernel 4.2+, intel i7-3770, 16g memory,
>>> 32g kingston sd card.
>>>
>>> fio --name seqw --ioengine=sync --invalidate=1 --rw=write --directory=/mnt/f2fs
>> --filesize=256m --size=16m --bs=2m --direct=1
>>> --numjobs=10
>>>
>>> before:
>>> WRITE: io=163840KB, aggrb=3145KB/s, minb=314KB/s, maxb=411KB/s, mint=39836msec,
>> maxt=52083msec
>>>
>>> patched:
>>> WRITE: io=163840KB, aggrb=10033KB/s, minb=1003KB/s, maxb=1124KB/s, mint=14565msec,
>> maxt=16329msec
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>> fs/f2fs/data.c | 13 ++++++++++---
>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> index a737ca5..a0a5849 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> @@ -1536,7 +1536,9 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,
>>> struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp;
>>> struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
>>> struct inode *inode = mapping->host;
>>> + struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
>>> size_t count = iov_iter_count(iter);
>>> + int rw = iov_iter_rw(iter);
>>> int err;
>>>
>>> /* we don't need to use inline_data strictly */
>>> @@ -1555,12 +1557,17 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter
>> *iter,
>>>
>>> trace_f2fs_direct_IO_enter(inode, offset, count, iov_iter_rw(iter));
>>>
>>> - if (iov_iter_rw(iter) == WRITE)
>>> + if (rw == WRITE) {
>>> + mutex_lock(&sbi->writepages);
>>
>> Why do we have to share sbi->writepages?
>
> The root cause of this issue is that: in f2fs, we have no suitable
> dispatcher which can do the following things as an atomic operation:
> a) allocate position(s) in flash device for current block(s);
> b) submit user data in allocated position(s) in block layer.
>
> Without the dispatcher, we will suffer performance issue in following
> scenario:
> Thread A Thread B Thread C
> allocate pos+1
> allocate pos+2
> allocate pos+3
> submit pos+1
> submit pos+3
> submit pos+2
>
> Our final submitting series will: pos+1, pos+3, pos+2, this makes f2fs
> running into non-LFS mode, therefore resulting in bad performance.
>
> writepages mutex lock supply us with a good solution for above issue.
> It not only make the allocating and submitting pair executing atomically,
> but also reduce the fragmentation for one file since we submit blocks
> belong to single inode as continuous as possible.
>
> So here I choose to use writepages mutex lock to fix the performance
> issue caused by both dio write vs dio write and dio write vs buffered
> write.
>
> If I'm missing something, please correct me.
>
>>
>>> __allocate_data_blocks(inode, offset, count);
>>
>> If the problem lies on the misaligned blocks, how about calling mutex_unlock
>> here?
>
> When changing to unlock here, I got regression when testing with following command:
> fio --name seqw --ioengine=sync --invalidate=1 --rw=write --directory=/mnt/f2fs --filesize=256m --size=4m --bs=64k --direct=1
> --numjobs=20
>
> unlock here:
> WRITE: io=81920KB, aggrb=5802KB/s, minb=290KB/s, maxb=292KB/s, mint=14010msec, maxt=14119msec
> unlock after dio finished:
> WRITE: io=81920KB, aggrb=6088KB/s, minb=304KB/s, maxb=1081KB/s, mint=3786msec, maxt=13454msec
>
> So how about keep it in original place in this patch?
Does share writepages mutex lock have an effect on cache write? Here is AndroBench result on my phone:
Before patch:
1R1W 8R8W 16R16W
Sequential Write 161.31 163.85 154.67
Random Write 9.48 17.66 18.09
After patch:
1R1W 8R8W 16R16W
Sequential Write 159.61 157.24 160.11
Random Write 9.17 8.51 8.8
Unit:Mb/s, File size: 64M, Buffer size: 4k
>
> Thanks,
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>> + }
>>>
>>> err = blockdev_direct_IO(iocb, inode, iter, offset, get_data_block_dio);
>>> - if (err < 0 && iov_iter_rw(iter) == WRITE)
>>> - f2fs_write_failed(mapping, offset + count);
>>> + if (rw == WRITE) {
>>> + mutex_unlock(&sbi->writepages);
>>> + if (err)
>>> + f2fs_write_failed(mapping, offset + count);
>>> + }
>>>
>>> trace_f2fs_direct_IO_exit(inode, offset, count, iov_iter_rw(iter), err);
>>>
>>> --
>>> 2.4.2
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
> _______________________________________________
> 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:[~2015-09-17 0:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-11 6:41 [PATCH 5/7] f2fs: enhance multithread dio write performance Chao Yu
2015-09-11 6:41 ` Chao Yu
2015-09-15 21:20 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2015-09-16 10:15 ` Chao Yu
2015-09-16 18:12 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2015-09-16 18:12 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2015-09-17 12:52 ` Chao Yu
2015-09-17 12:52 ` Chao Yu
2015-09-17 17:48 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2015-09-18 8:49 ` Chao Yu
2015-09-18 8:49 ` Chao Yu
2015-09-17 0:39 ` He YunLei [this message]
2015-09-17 0:39 ` [f2fs-dev] " He YunLei
2015-09-17 12:53 ` Chao Yu
2015-12-11 10:26 ` Chao Yu
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=55FA0BDB.5090104@huawei.com \
--to=heyunlei@huawei.com \
--cc=chao2.yu@samsung.com \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.