From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Ted Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] jbd2: Fix dbench4 performance regression for 'nobarrier' mounts
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 11:59:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170428095934.11583-1-jack@suse.cz> (raw)
Commit b685d3d65ac7 "block: treat REQ_FUA and REQ_PREFLUSH as
synchronous" removed REQ_SYNC flag from WRITE_FUA implementation. Since
JBD2 strips REQ_FUA and REQ_FLUSH flags from submitted IO when the
filesystem is mounted with nobarrier mount option, journal superblock
writes ended up being async writes after this patch and that caused
heavy performance regression for dbench4 benchmark with high number of
processes. In my test setup with HP RAID array with non-volatile write
cache and 32 GB ram, dbench4 runs with 8 processes regressed by ~25%.
Fix the problem by making sure journal superblock writes are always
treated as synchronous since they generally block progress of the
journalling machinery and thus the whole filesystem.
Fixes: b685d3d65ac791406e0dfd8779cc9b3707fea5a3
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
---
fs/jbd2/journal.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/jbd2/journal.c b/fs/jbd2/journal.c
index 5adc2fb62b0f..e768126f6a72 100644
--- a/fs/jbd2/journal.c
+++ b/fs/jbd2/journal.c
@@ -1348,7 +1348,7 @@ static int jbd2_write_superblock(journal_t *journal, int write_flags)
jbd2_superblock_csum_set(journal, sb);
get_bh(bh);
bh->b_end_io = end_buffer_write_sync;
- ret = submit_bh(REQ_OP_WRITE, write_flags, bh);
+ ret = submit_bh(REQ_OP_WRITE, write_flags | REQ_SYNC, bh);
wait_on_buffer(bh);
if (buffer_write_io_error(bh)) {
clear_buffer_write_io_error(bh);
--
2.12.0
next reply other threads:[~2017-04-28 9:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-28 9:59 Jan Kara [this message]
2017-04-28 15:03 ` [PATCH] jbd2: Fix dbench4 performance regression for 'nobarrier' mounts Christoph Hellwig
2017-05-02 9:36 ` Jan Kara
2017-04-30 1:14 ` Theodore Ts'o
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=20170428095934.11583-1-jack@suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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