From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] loop: Add PF_LESS_THROTTLE to block/loop device thread.
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 15:02:09 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <149758932925.10006.1411305319375332201.stgit@noble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <149758925866.10006.12779875832895865043.stgit@noble>
When a filesystem is mounted from a loop device, writes are
throttled by balance_dirty_pages() twice: once when writing
to the filesystem and once when the loop_handle_cmd() writes
to the backing file. This double-throttling can trigger
positive feedback loops that create significant delays. The
throttling at the lower level is seen by the upper level as
a slow device, so it throttles extra hard.
The PF_LESS_THROTTLE flag was created to handle exactly this
circumstance, though with an NFS filesystem mounted from a
local NFS server. It reduces the throttling on the lower
layer so that it can proceed largely unthrottled.
To demonstrate this, create a filesystem on a loop device
and write (e.g. with dd) several large files which combine
to consume significantly more than the limit set by
/proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio or dirty_bytes. Measure the total
time taken.
When I do this directly on a device (no loop device) the
total time for several runs (mkfs, mount, write 200 files,
umount) is fairly stable: 28-35 seconds.
When I do this over a loop device the times are much worse
and less stable. 52-460 seconds. Half below 100seconds,
half above.
When I apply this patch, the times become stable again,
though not as fast as the no-loop-back case: 53-72 seconds.
There may be room for further improvement as the total overhead still
seems too high, but this is a big improvement.
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
---
drivers/block/loop.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
index 9c457ca6c55e..6ed7c4506951 100644
--- a/drivers/block/loop.c
+++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
@@ -843,10 +843,16 @@ static void loop_unprepare_queue(struct loop_device *lo)
kthread_stop(lo->worker_task);
}
+static int loop_kthread_worker_fn(void *worker_ptr)
+{
+ current->flags |= PF_LESS_THROTTLE;
+ return kthread_worker_fn(worker_ptr);
+}
+
static int loop_prepare_queue(struct loop_device *lo)
{
kthread_init_worker(&lo->worker);
- lo->worker_task = kthread_run(kthread_worker_fn,
+ lo->worker_task = kthread_run(loop_kthread_worker_fn,
&lo->worker, "loop%d", lo->lo_number);
if (IS_ERR(lo->worker_task))
return -ENOMEM;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-16 5:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-16 5:02 [PATCH 0/2] Two fixes for loop devices NeilBrown
2017-06-16 5:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] loop: use filp_close() rather than fput() NeilBrown
2017-06-16 7:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-06-17 0:01 ` Al Viro
2017-06-18 4:30 ` NeilBrown
2017-06-16 5:02 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2017-06-16 7:36 ` [PATCH 2/2] loop: Add PF_LESS_THROTTLE to block/loop device thread Christoph Hellwig
2017-06-16 14:29 ` [PATCH 0/2] Two fixes for loop devices Jens Axboe
2017-06-18 4:33 ` NeilBrown
2017-06-18 15:06 ` Jens Axboe
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=149758932925.10006.1411305319375332201.stgit@noble \
--to=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox