From: Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>
To: Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
Cc: "fio@vger.kernel.org" <fio@vger.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Vincent Fu <vincentfu@gmail.com>,
Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
Dmitry Fomichev <Dmitry.Fomichev@wdc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] zbd: refer file->last_start[] instead of sectors with data accounting
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 14:05:42 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y+JatNhCWDQexWJd@x1-carbon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230207063739.1661191-2-shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 03:37:32PM +0900, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> To decide the first IO direction of randrw workload, the function
> zbd_adjust_ddir() refers to the zbd_info->sectors_with_data value which
> indicates the number of bytes written to the zoned block devices being
> accessed. However, this accounting has two issues. The first issue is
> wrong accounting for multiple jobs with different write ranges. The
> second issue is job start up failure due to zone lock contention.
>
> Avoid using zbd_info->sectors_with_data and simply refer to file->
> last_start[DDIR_WRITE] instead. It is initialized with -1ULL for each
> job. After any write operation is done by the job, it keeps valid
> offset. If it has valid offset, written data is expected and the first
> IO direction can be read.
>
> Also remove zbd_info->sectors_with_data, which is no longer used. Keep
> the field zbd_info->wp_sectors_with_data since it is still used for
> zones with write pointers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
> ---
> zbd.c | 14 +++-----------
> zbd.h | 2 --
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/zbd.c b/zbd.c
> index d1e469f6..f5e76c40 100644
> --- a/zbd.c
> +++ b/zbd.c
> @@ -286,7 +286,6 @@ static int zbd_reset_zone(struct thread_data *td, struct fio_file *f,
> }
>
> pthread_mutex_lock(&f->zbd_info->mutex);
> - f->zbd_info->sectors_with_data -= data_in_zone;
> f->zbd_info->wp_sectors_with_data -= data_in_zone;
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&f->zbd_info->mutex);
>
> @@ -1201,7 +1200,6 @@ static uint64_t zbd_process_swd(struct thread_data *td,
> const struct fio_file *f, enum swd_action a)
> {
> struct fio_zone_info *zb, *ze, *z;
> - uint64_t swd = 0;
> uint64_t wp_swd = 0;
>
> zb = zbd_get_zone(f, f->min_zone);
> @@ -1211,17 +1209,14 @@ static uint64_t zbd_process_swd(struct thread_data *td,
> zone_lock(td, f, z);
> wp_swd += z->wp - z->start;
> }
> - swd += z->wp - z->start;
> }
>
> pthread_mutex_lock(&f->zbd_info->mutex);
> switch (a) {
> case CHECK_SWD:
> - assert(f->zbd_info->sectors_with_data == swd);
> assert(f->zbd_info->wp_sectors_with_data == wp_swd);
> break;
> case SET_SWD:
> - f->zbd_info->sectors_with_data = swd;
> f->zbd_info->wp_sectors_with_data = wp_swd;
> break;
> }
> @@ -1231,7 +1226,7 @@ static uint64_t zbd_process_swd(struct thread_data *td,
> if (z->has_wp)
> zone_unlock(z);
>
> - return swd;
> + return wp_swd;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -1640,10 +1635,8 @@ static void zbd_queue_io(struct thread_data *td, struct io_u *io_u, int q,
> * have occurred.
> */
> pthread_mutex_lock(&zbd_info->mutex);
> - if (z->wp <= zone_end) {
> - zbd_info->sectors_with_data += zone_end - z->wp;
> + if (z->wp <= zone_end)
> zbd_info->wp_sectors_with_data += zone_end - z->wp;
> - }
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&zbd_info->mutex);
> z->wp = zone_end;
> break;
> @@ -1801,8 +1794,7 @@ enum fio_ddir zbd_adjust_ddir(struct thread_data *td, struct io_u *io_u,
> if (ddir != DDIR_READ || !td_rw(td))
> return ddir;
>
> - if (io_u->file->zbd_info->sectors_with_data ||
> - td->o.read_beyond_wp)
> + if (io_u->file->last_start[DDIR_WRITE] != -1ULL || td->o.read_beyond_wp)
> return DDIR_READ;
>
> return DDIR_WRITE;
> diff --git a/zbd.h b/zbd.h
> index d425707e..9ab25c47 100644
> --- a/zbd.h
> +++ b/zbd.h
> @@ -54,7 +54,6 @@ struct fio_zone_info {
> * @mutex: Protects the modifiable members in this structure (refcount and
> * num_open_zones).
> * @zone_size: size of a single zone in bytes.
> - * @sectors_with_data: total size of data in all zones in units of 512 bytes
> * @wp_sectors_with_data: total size of data in zones with write pointers in
> * units of 512 bytes
> * @zone_size_log2: log2 of the zone size in bytes if it is a power of 2 or 0
> @@ -76,7 +75,6 @@ struct zoned_block_device_info {
> uint32_t max_open_zones;
> pthread_mutex_t mutex;
> uint64_t zone_size;
> - uint64_t sectors_with_data;
> uint64_t wp_sectors_with_data;
> uint32_t zone_size_log2;
> uint32_t nr_zones;
> --
> 2.38.1
>
Reviewed-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@wdc.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-07 14:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-07 6:37 [PATCH v2 0/8] zbd: fix 'sectors with data' and zone_reset_threshold accounting issues Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 6:37 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] zbd: refer file->last_start[] instead of sectors with data accounting Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 14:05 ` Niklas Cassel [this message]
2023-02-07 6:37 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] zbd: remove CHECK_SWD feature Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 14:05 ` Niklas Cassel
2023-02-07 6:37 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] zbd: rename the accounting 'sectors with data' to 'valid data bytes' Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 14:06 ` Niklas Cassel
2023-02-07 6:37 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] doc: fix unit of zone_reset_threshold and relation to other option Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 14:06 ` Niklas Cassel
2023-02-07 6:37 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] zbd: account valid data bytes only for zone_reset_threshold option Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 14:06 ` Niklas Cassel
2023-02-07 6:37 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] zbd: check write ranges " Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 14:06 ` Niklas Cassel
2023-02-08 4:59 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 6:37 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] zbd: initialize valid data bytes accounting at file set up Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 14:06 ` Niklas Cassel
2023-02-08 5:03 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-08 8:30 ` Niklas Cassel
2023-02-07 6:37 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] t/zbd: add test cases for zone_reset_threshold option Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-02-07 14:06 ` Niklas Cassel
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=Y+JatNhCWDQexWJd@x1-carbon \
--to=niklas.cassel@wdc.com \
--cc=Dmitry.Fomichev@wdc.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
--cc=fio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com \
--cc=vincentfu@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox