From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Cc: tj@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, paolo.valente@linaro.org,
jack@suse.cz, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
yi.zhang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 10/11] block, bfq: decrease 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs' earlier
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 13:28:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220413112816.fwobg4cp6ttpnpk6@quack3.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220305091205.4188398-11-yukuai3@huawei.com>
On Sat 05-03-22 17:12:04, Yu Kuai wrote:
> Currently 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs' won't be decreased when
> the group doesn't have any pending requests, while some child group
> still have pending requests. The decrement is delayed to when all the
> child groups doesn't have any pending requests.
>
> For example:
> 1) t1 issue sync io on root group, t2 and t3 issue sync io on the same
> child group. num_groups_with_pending_reqs is 2 now.
> 2) t1 stopped, num_groups_with_pending_reqs is still 2. io from t2 and
> t3 still can't be handled concurrently.
>
> Fix the problem by decreasing 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs'
> immediately upon the weights_tree removal of last bfqq of the group.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
So I'd find the logic easier to follow if you completely removed
entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs and did updates of
bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs like:
if (!bfqg->num_entities_with_pending_reqs++)
bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs++;
and similarly on the remove side. And there would we literally two places
(addition & removal from weight tree) that would need to touch these
counters. Pretty obvious and all can be done in patch 9.
Honza
> ---
> block/bfq-iosched.c | 56 +++++++++++++++------------------------------
> block/bfq-iosched.h | 16 ++++++-------
> 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
> index f221e9cab4d0..119b64c9c1d9 100644
> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
> @@ -970,6 +970,24 @@ void __bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
> bfq_put_queue(bfqq);
> }
>
> +static void decrease_groups_with_pending_reqs(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
> + struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED
> + struct bfq_entity *entity = bfqq->entity.parent;
> +
> + /*
> + * The decrement of num_groups_with_pending_reqs is performed
> + * immediately when the last bfqq completes all the requests.
> + */
> + if (!bfqq_group(bfqq)->num_entities_with_pending_reqs &&
> + entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
> + entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = false;
> + bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs--;
> + }
> +#endif
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Invoke __bfq_weights_tree_remove on bfqq and decrement the number
> * of active groups for each queue's inactive parent entity.
> @@ -977,8 +995,6 @@ void __bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
> void bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
> struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
> {
> - struct bfq_entity *entity = bfqq->entity.parent;
> -
> /*
> * grab a ref to prevent bfqq to be freed in
> * __bfq_weights_tree_remove
> @@ -991,41 +1007,7 @@ void bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
> */
> __bfq_weights_tree_remove(bfqd, bfqq,
> &bfqd->queue_weights_tree);
> -
> - for_each_entity(entity) {
> - struct bfq_sched_data *sd = entity->my_sched_data;
> -
> - if (sd->next_in_service || sd->in_service_entity) {
> - /*
> - * entity is still active, because either
> - * next_in_service or in_service_entity is not
> - * NULL (see the comments on the definition of
> - * next_in_service for details on why
> - * in_service_entity must be checked too).
> - *
> - * As a consequence, its parent entities are
> - * active as well, and thus this loop must
> - * stop here.
> - */
> - break;
> - }
> -
> - /*
> - * The decrement of num_groups_with_pending_reqs is
> - * not performed immediately upon the deactivation of
> - * entity, but it is delayed to when it also happens
> - * that the first leaf descendant bfqq of entity gets
> - * all its pending requests completed. The following
> - * instructions perform this delayed decrement, if
> - * needed. See the comments on
> - * num_groups_with_pending_reqs for details.
> - */
> - if (entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
> - entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = false;
> - bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs--;
> - }
> - }
> -
> + decrease_groups_with_pending_reqs(bfqd, bfqq);
> bfq_put_queue(bfqq);
> }
>
> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.h b/block/bfq-iosched.h
> index 5d904851519c..9ec72bd24fc2 100644
> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.h
> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.h
> @@ -495,7 +495,7 @@ struct bfq_data {
> struct rb_root_cached queue_weights_tree;
>
> /*
> - * Number of groups with at least one descendant process that
> + * Number of groups with at least one process that
> * has at least one request waiting for completion. Note that
> * this accounts for also requests already dispatched, but not
> * yet completed. Therefore this number of groups may differ
> @@ -508,14 +508,14 @@ struct bfq_data {
> * bfq_better_to_idle().
> *
> * However, it is hard to compute this number exactly, for
> - * groups with multiple descendant processes. Consider a group
> - * that is inactive, i.e., that has no descendant process with
> + * groups with multiple processes. Consider a group
> + * that is inactive, i.e., that has no process with
> * pending I/O inside BFQ queues. Then suppose that
> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs is still accounting for this
> - * group, because the group has descendant processes with some
> + * group, because the group has processes with some
> * I/O request still in flight. num_groups_with_pending_reqs
> * should be decremented when the in-flight request of the
> - * last descendant process is finally completed (assuming that
> + * last process is finally completed (assuming that
> * nothing else has changed for the group in the meantime, in
> * terms of composition of the group and active/inactive state of child
> * groups and processes). To accomplish this, an additional
> @@ -524,7 +524,7 @@ struct bfq_data {
> * we resort to the following tradeoff between simplicity and
> * accuracy: for an inactive group that is still counted in
> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs, we decrement
> - * num_groups_with_pending_reqs when the first descendant
> + * num_groups_with_pending_reqs when the last
> * process of the group remains with no request waiting for
> * completion.
> *
> @@ -532,12 +532,12 @@ struct bfq_data {
> * carefulness: to avoid multiple decrements, we flag a group,
> * more precisely an entity representing a group, as still
> * counted in num_groups_with_pending_reqs when it becomes
> - * inactive. Then, when the first descendant queue of the
> + * inactive. Then, when the last queue of the
> * entity remains with no request waiting for completion,
> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs is decremented, and this flag
> * is reset. After this flag is reset for the entity,
> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs won't be decremented any
> - * longer in case a new descendant queue of the entity remains
> + * longer in case a new queue of the entity remains
> * with no request waiting for completion.
> */
> unsigned int num_groups_with_pending_reqs;
> --
> 2.31.1
>
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-13 11:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-05 9:11 [PATCH -next 00/11] support concurrent sync io for bfq on a specail occasion Yu Kuai
2022-03-05 9:11 ` [PATCH -next 01/11] block, bfq: add new apis to iterate bfq entities Yu Kuai
2022-03-05 9:11 ` [PATCH -next 02/11] block, bfq: apply news apis where root group is not expected Yu Kuai
2022-04-13 9:50 ` Jan Kara
2022-04-13 10:59 ` Jan Kara
2022-04-13 11:11 ` yukuai (C)
2022-03-05 9:11 ` [PATCH -next 03/11] block, bfq: cleanup for __bfq_activate_requeue_entity() Yu Kuai
2022-03-05 9:11 ` [PATCH -next 04/11] block, bfq: move the increasement of 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs' to it's caller Yu Kuai
2022-03-05 9:11 ` [PATCH -next 05/11] block, bfq: count root group into 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs' Yu Kuai
2022-04-13 11:05 ` Jan Kara
2022-03-05 9:12 ` [PATCH -next 06/11] block, bfq: do not idle if only one cgroup is activated Yu Kuai
2022-03-05 9:12 ` [PATCH -next 07/11] block, bfq: only count parent bfqg when bfqq " Yu Kuai
2022-03-05 9:12 ` [PATCH -next 08/11] block, bfq: record how many queues have pending requests in bfq_group Yu Kuai
2022-03-05 9:12 ` [PATCH -next 09/11] block, bfq: move forward __bfq_weights_tree_remove() Yu Kuai
2022-03-05 9:12 ` [PATCH -next 10/11] block, bfq: decrease 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs' earlier Yu Kuai
2022-04-13 11:28 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2022-04-13 11:40 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-15 1:10 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-19 9:49 ` Jan Kara
2022-04-19 11:37 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-21 8:17 ` Jan Kara
2022-03-05 9:12 ` [PATCH -next 11/11] block, bfq: cleanup bfqq_group() Yu Kuai
2022-03-11 6:31 ` [PATCH -next 00/11] support concurrent sync io for bfq on a specail occasion yukuai (C)
2022-03-17 1:49 ` yukuai (C)
2022-03-18 12:38 ` Paolo Valente
2022-03-19 2:34 ` yukuai (C)
2022-03-25 7:30 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-01 3:43 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-08 6:50 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-13 11:12 ` Jan Kara
2022-04-13 11:33 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-26 14:24 ` Paolo Valente
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=20220413112816.fwobg4cp6ttpnpk6@quack3.lan \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.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