From: tytso@mit.edu
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Mingming Cao <cmm@us.ibm.com>,
keith maanthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: ext4 dbench performance with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:10:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100408211054.GB1849@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1270759317.3373.7.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 01:41:57PM -0700, john stultz wrote:
>
> I'll continue to play with your patch and see if I can con some some
> folks with more interesting storage setups to do some testing as well.
You might want to ask djwong to play with it with his nice big
machine. (We don't need a big file system, but we want as many CPU's
as possible, and to use his "mailserver" workload to really stress the
journal. I'd recommend using barrier=0 for additional journal
lock-level stress testing, and then try some forced sysrq-b reboots
and then make sure that the filesystem is consistent after the journal
replay.)
I've since done basic two-CPU testing using xfstests under KVM, but
that's really not going to test any locking issues.
> Any thoughts for ways to rework the state_lock in start_this_handle?
> (Now that its at the top of the contention logs? :)
That's going to be much harder. We're going to have to take
j_state_lock at some point inside start_this_handle. We might be able
to decrease the amount of code which is run while the spinlock is
taken, but I very much doubt it's possible to eliminate that spinlock
entirely.
Do you have detailed lockstat information showing the hold-time and
wait-time of j_lock_stat (especially in start_this_handle)?
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-08 21:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-07 23:21 ext4 dbench performance with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT john stultz
2010-04-08 3:46 ` tytso
2010-04-08 10:18 ` Theodore Tso
2010-04-08 20:41 ` john stultz
2010-04-08 21:10 ` tytso [this message]
2010-04-13 3:52 ` john stultz
2010-04-14 3:04 ` john stultz
2010-04-08 22:37 ` Mingming Cao
2010-04-12 19:46 ` Jan Kara
2010-04-13 14:52 ` tytso
2010-04-13 16:25 ` Darren Hart
2010-06-02 22:35 ` j_state_lock patch data (was: Re: ext4 dbench performance with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) Eric Whitney
2010-04-09 15:49 ` ext4 dbench performance with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT Andi Kleen
2010-04-09 23:33 ` tytso
2010-04-09 23:48 ` Chen, Tim C
2010-04-09 23:57 ` john stultz
2010-04-10 11:58 ` tytso
2010-04-12 19:54 ` Chen, Tim C
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=20100408211054.GB1849@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kmannth@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).