From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, jeff.liu@oracle.com,
hughd@google.com, xiaoqiangnk@gmail.com,
achender@linux.vnet.ibm.com, lczerner@redhat.com,
Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8 v3] ext4: add operations on extent status tree
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 10:22:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121109022255.GA27826@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121108232123.GP19977@thunk.org>
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:21:23PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 09:23:39PM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote:
> > + * 3. performance analysis
> > + * -- overhead
> > + * 1. Apart from operations on a delayed extent tree, we need to
> > + * down_write(inode->i_data_sem) in delayed write path to maintain delayed
> > + * extent tree, this can have impact on parallel read-write and write-write
>
> Hi Zheng,
>
> I can fix this up, before I finalize your commit, but I just want to
> check. I believe this comment is out of date --- we are now using a
> r/w spinlock, i_es_lock, yes? Since we never hold the spinlock for
> very long, I would be surprised if this is going to be a scalability
> bottleneck (too bad Eric doesn't have access to the big SMP machine
> that he used to use to help us do our scalability testing, so we could
> check to be sure).
Hi Ted,
Oops, it is my fault. Indeed it needs to be replaced with i_es_lock. I
can do some tests in a server which has 16 cores, but I am afraid that
it is not so big as you thought. I am willing to run Eric's tests to
ensure that there is no any scalability problem.
Regards,
Zheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-09 2:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-26 13:23 [PATCH 0/8 v3] ext4: extent status tree (step 1) Zheng Liu
2012-10-26 13:23 ` [PATCH 1/8 v3] ext4: add two structures supporting extent status tree Zheng Liu
2012-10-26 13:23 ` [PATCH 2/8 v3] ext4: add operations on " Zheng Liu
2012-11-08 23:21 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-11-09 2:22 ` Zheng Liu [this message]
2012-10-26 13:23 ` [PATCH 3/8 v3] ext4: initialize " Zheng Liu
2012-10-26 13:23 ` [PATCH 4/8 v3] ext4: let ext4 maintain " Zheng Liu
2012-10-26 13:23 ` [PATCH 5/8 v3] ext4: add some tracepoints in " Zheng Liu
2012-10-26 13:23 ` [PATCH 6/8 v3] ext4: reimplement ext4_find_delay_alloc_range on " Zheng Liu
2012-10-26 13:23 ` [PATCH 7/8 v3] ext4: reimplement fiemap " Zheng Liu
2012-10-26 13:23 ` [PATCH 8/8 v3] ext4: introduce lseek SEEK_DATA/SEEK_HOLE support Zheng Liu
2012-10-27 10:05 ` Jeff Liu
2012-10-27 15:30 ` Zheng Liu
2012-11-19 3:17 ` [PATCH 0/8 v3] ext4: extent status tree (step 1) Theodore Ts'o
2012-11-19 5:28 ` Zheng Liu
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=20121109022255.GA27826@gmail.com \
--to=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com \
--cc=achender@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jeff.liu@oracle.com \
--cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=wenqing.lz@taobao.com \
--cc=xiaoqiangnk@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).