All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
To: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] Writeback fix for concurrent large and small file writes
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:34:33 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <396296481.07368@ustc.edu.cn> (raw)
Message-ID: <E1IxXMP-0002i8-4S@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071128192957.511EAB8310@localhost>

On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:29:57AM -0800, Michael Rubin wrote:
> >From mrubin@matchstick.corp.google.com Wed Nov 28 11:10:06 2007
> Message-Id: <20071128190121.716364000@matchstick.corp.google.com>
> Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 11:01:21 -0800
> From: mrubin@google.com
> To: mrubin@google.com
> Subject: [patch 1/1] Writeback fix for concurrent large and small file writes.
> 
> From: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
> 
> Fixing a bug where writing to large files while concurrently writing to
> smaller ones creates a situation where writeback cannot keep up with the

Could you demonstrate the situation? Or if I guess it right, could it
be fixed by the following patch? (not a nack: If so, your patch could
also be considered as a general purpose improvement, instead of a bug
fix.)

diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
index 0fca820..62e62e2 100644
--- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
+++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
@@ -301,7 +301,7 @@ __sync_single_inode(struct inode *inode, struct writeback_control *wbc)
 			 * Someone redirtied the inode while were writing back
 			 * the pages.
 			 */
-			redirty_tail(inode);
+			requeue_io(inode);
 		} else if (atomic_read(&inode->i_count)) {
 			/*
 			 * The inode is clean, inuse

Thank you,
Fengguang

> traffic and memory baloons until the we hit the threshold watermark. This
> can result in surprising latency spikes when syncing. This latency
> can take minutes on large memory systems. Upon request I can provide
> a test to reproduce this situation. The flush tree fixes this issue and
> fixes several other minor issues with fairness also.
> 
> 1) Adding a data structure to guarantee fairness when writing inodes
> to disk.  The flush_tree is based on an rbtree. The only difference is
> how duplicate keys are chained off the same rb_node.
> 
> 2) Added a FS flag to mark file systems that are not disk backed so we
> don't have to flush them. Not sure I marked all of them. But just marking
> these improves writeback performance.
> 
> 3) Added an inode flag to allow inodes to be marked so that they are
> never written back to disk. See get_pipe_inode.
> 
> Under autotest this patch has passed: fsx, bonnie, and iozone. I am
> currently writing more writeback focused tests (which so far have been
> passed) to add into autotest.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
> ---


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
To: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] Writeback fix for concurrent large and small file writes
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:34:33 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <396296481.07368@ustc.edu.cn> (raw)
Message-ID: <E1IxXMP-0002i8-4S@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071128192957.511EAB8310@localhost>

On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:29:57AM -0800, Michael Rubin wrote:
> >From mrubin@matchstick.corp.google.com Wed Nov 28 11:10:06 2007
> Message-Id: <20071128190121.716364000@matchstick.corp.google.com>
> Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 11:01:21 -0800
> From: mrubin@google.com
> To: mrubin@google.com
> Subject: [patch 1/1] Writeback fix for concurrent large and small file writes.
> 
> From: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
> 
> Fixing a bug where writing to large files while concurrently writing to
> smaller ones creates a situation where writeback cannot keep up with the

Could you demonstrate the situation? Or if I guess it right, could it
be fixed by the following patch? (not a nack: If so, your patch could
also be considered as a general purpose improvement, instead of a bug
fix.)

diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
index 0fca820..62e62e2 100644
--- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
+++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
@@ -301,7 +301,7 @@ __sync_single_inode(struct inode *inode, struct writeback_control *wbc)
 			 * Someone redirtied the inode while were writing back
 			 * the pages.
 			 */
-			redirty_tail(inode);
+			requeue_io(inode);
 		} else if (atomic_read(&inode->i_count)) {
 			/*
 			 * The inode is clean, inuse

Thank you,
Fengguang

> traffic and memory baloons until the we hit the threshold watermark. This
> can result in surprising latency spikes when syncing. This latency
> can take minutes on large memory systems. Upon request I can provide
> a test to reproduce this situation. The flush tree fixes this issue and
> fixes several other minor issues with fairness also.
> 
> 1) Adding a data structure to guarantee fairness when writing inodes
> to disk.  The flush_tree is based on an rbtree. The only difference is
> how duplicate keys are chained off the same rb_node.
> 
> 2) Added a FS flag to mark file systems that are not disk backed so we
> don't have to flush them. Not sure I marked all of them. But just marking
> these improves writeback performance.
> 
> 3) Added an inode flag to allow inodes to be marked so that they are
> never written back to disk. See get_pipe_inode.
> 
> Under autotest this patch has passed: fsx, bonnie, and iozone. I am
> currently writing more writeback focused tests (which so far have been
> passed) to add into autotest.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
> ---

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2007-11-29  0:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-28 19:29 [patch 1/1] Writeback fix for concurrent large and small file writes Michael Rubin
2007-11-28 19:29 ` Michael Rubin
2007-11-29  0:34 ` Fengguang Wu [this message]
2007-11-29  0:34   ` Fengguang Wu
2007-11-29  0:34     ` Fengguang Wu
2007-11-29 19:51     ` Michael Rubin
2007-11-29 19:51       ` Michael Rubin
2007-11-29 20:16     ` Michael Rubin
2007-11-29 20:16       ` Michael Rubin
2007-11-30  1:32       ` Fengguang Wu
2007-11-30  1:32         ` Fengguang Wu
2007-11-30  1:32           ` Fengguang Wu
2007-12-04  9:06           ` Michael Rubin
2007-12-04  9:06             ` Michael Rubin
2007-11-29  2:13 ` Frans Pop
2007-11-29  2:13   ` Frans Pop
2007-11-29  6:58   ` Michael Rubin
2007-11-29  6:58     ` Michael Rubin
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-12-11  2:02 Michael Rubin
2007-12-11  2:02 ` Michael Rubin, Michael Rubin
2007-12-12 20:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-12 20:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-12 23:03   ` Michael Rubin
2007-12-12 23:03     ` Michael Rubin
2007-12-28  7:35 ` Fengguang Wu
2007-12-28  7:35   ` Fengguang Wu
2007-12-28  7:35     ` Fengguang Wu

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=396296481.07368@ustc.edu.cn \
    --to=wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mrubin@google.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.