From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>, David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Cc: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: use a normal workqueue for rmw_workers
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 06:43:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220418044311.359720-4-hch@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220418044311.359720-1-hch@lst.de>
rmw_workers doesn't need ordered execution or thread disabling threshold
(as the thresh parameter is less than DFT_THRESHOLD).
Just switch to the normal workqueues that use a lot less resources,
especially in the work_struct vs btrfs_work structures.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 2 +-
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 5 ++---
fs/btrfs/raid56.c | 29 ++++++++++++++---------------
3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
index 59135f0850a6e..74fbd92f704f9 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
@@ -853,7 +853,7 @@ struct btrfs_fs_info {
struct btrfs_workqueue *endio_workers;
struct btrfs_workqueue *endio_meta_workers;
struct btrfs_workqueue *endio_raid56_workers;
- struct btrfs_workqueue *rmw_workers;
+ struct workqueue_struct *rmw_workers;
struct btrfs_workqueue *endio_meta_write_workers;
struct btrfs_workqueue *endio_write_workers;
struct btrfs_workqueue *endio_freespace_worker;
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
index 980616cc08bfc..cc7ca8a0df697 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
@@ -2290,7 +2290,7 @@ static void btrfs_stop_all_workers(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
btrfs_destroy_workqueue(fs_info->workers);
btrfs_destroy_workqueue(fs_info->endio_workers);
btrfs_destroy_workqueue(fs_info->endio_raid56_workers);
- btrfs_destroy_workqueue(fs_info->rmw_workers);
+ destroy_workqueue(fs_info->rmw_workers);
btrfs_destroy_workqueue(fs_info->endio_write_workers);
btrfs_destroy_workqueue(fs_info->endio_freespace_worker);
btrfs_destroy_workqueue(fs_info->delayed_workers);
@@ -2500,8 +2500,7 @@ static int btrfs_init_workqueues(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
fs_info->endio_raid56_workers =
btrfs_alloc_workqueue(fs_info, "endio-raid56", flags,
max_active, 4);
- fs_info->rmw_workers =
- btrfs_alloc_workqueue(fs_info, "rmw", flags, max_active, 2);
+ fs_info->rmw_workers = alloc_workqueue("btrfs-rmw", flags, max_active);
fs_info->endio_write_workers =
btrfs_alloc_workqueue(fs_info, "endio-write", flags,
max_active, 2);
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c b/fs/btrfs/raid56.c
index 79438cdd604ea..c1c320f87216d 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/raid56.c
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ struct btrfs_raid_bio {
/*
* for scheduling work in the helper threads
*/
- struct btrfs_work work;
+ struct work_struct work;
/*
* bio list and bio_list_lock are used
@@ -176,8 +176,8 @@ struct btrfs_raid_bio {
static int __raid56_parity_recover(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio);
static noinline void finish_rmw(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio);
-static void rmw_work(struct btrfs_work *work);
-static void read_rebuild_work(struct btrfs_work *work);
+static void rmw_work(struct work_struct *work);
+static void read_rebuild_work(struct work_struct *work);
static int fail_bio_stripe(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio, struct bio *bio);
static int fail_rbio_index(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio, int failed);
static void __free_raid_bio(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio);
@@ -186,12 +186,12 @@ static int alloc_rbio_pages(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio);
static noinline void finish_parity_scrub(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio,
int need_check);
-static void scrub_parity_work(struct btrfs_work *work);
+static void scrub_parity_work(struct work_struct *work);
-static void start_async_work(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio, btrfs_func_t work_func)
+static void start_async_work(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio, work_func_t work_func)
{
- btrfs_init_work(&rbio->work, work_func, NULL, NULL);
- btrfs_queue_work(rbio->bioc->fs_info->rmw_workers, &rbio->work);
+ INIT_WORK(&rbio->work, work_func);
+ queue_work(rbio->bioc->fs_info->rmw_workers, &rbio->work);
}
/*
@@ -1599,7 +1599,7 @@ struct btrfs_plug_cb {
struct blk_plug_cb cb;
struct btrfs_fs_info *info;
struct list_head rbio_list;
- struct btrfs_work work;
+ struct work_struct work;
};
/*
@@ -1667,7 +1667,7 @@ static void run_plug(struct btrfs_plug_cb *plug)
* if the unplug comes from schedule, we have to push the
* work off to a helper thread
*/
-static void unplug_work(struct btrfs_work *work)
+static void unplug_work(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct btrfs_plug_cb *plug;
plug = container_of(work, struct btrfs_plug_cb, work);
@@ -1680,9 +1680,8 @@ static void btrfs_raid_unplug(struct blk_plug_cb *cb, bool from_schedule)
plug = container_of(cb, struct btrfs_plug_cb, cb);
if (from_schedule) {
- btrfs_init_work(&plug->work, unplug_work, NULL, NULL);
- btrfs_queue_work(plug->info->rmw_workers,
- &plug->work);
+ INIT_WORK(&plug->work, unplug_work);
+ queue_work(plug->info->rmw_workers, &plug->work);
return;
}
run_plug(plug);
@@ -2167,7 +2166,7 @@ int raid56_parity_recover(struct bio *bio, struct btrfs_io_context *bioc,
}
-static void rmw_work(struct btrfs_work *work)
+static void rmw_work(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio;
@@ -2175,7 +2174,7 @@ static void rmw_work(struct btrfs_work *work)
raid56_rmw_stripe(rbio);
}
-static void read_rebuild_work(struct btrfs_work *work)
+static void read_rebuild_work(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio;
@@ -2621,7 +2620,7 @@ static void raid56_parity_scrub_stripe(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio)
validate_rbio_for_parity_scrub(rbio);
}
-static void scrub_parity_work(struct btrfs_work *work)
+static void scrub_parity_work(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio;
--
2.30.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-18 4:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-18 4:43 btrfs_workqueue cleanups Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-18 4:43 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: simplify WQ_HIGHPRI handling in struct btrfs_workqueue Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-18 8:03 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-04-22 21:05 ` David Sterba
2022-04-22 22:58 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-04-23 5:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-18 4:43 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: use normal workqueues for scrub Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-18 8:04 ` Qu Wenruo
2022-04-18 4:43 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2022-04-18 8:05 ` [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: use a normal workqueue for rmw_workers Qu Wenruo
2022-04-22 21:22 ` btrfs_workqueue cleanups David Sterba
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=20220418044311.359720-4-hch@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wqu@suse.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