From: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
To: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <tytso@mit.edu>, <jack@suse.cz>, <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>,
<ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<yi.zhang@huawei.com>, <yangerkun@huawei.com>,
<libaokun1@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 03/16] ext4: remove unnecessary s_md_lock on update s_mb_last_group
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 15:32:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250623073304.3275702-4-libaokun1@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250623073304.3275702-1-libaokun1@huawei.com>
After we optimized the block group lock, we found another lock
contention issue when running will-it-scale/fallocate2 with multiple
processes. The fallocate's block allocation and the truncate's block
release were fighting over the s_md_lock. The problem is, this lock
protects totally different things in those two processes: the list of
freed data blocks (s_freed_data_list) when releasing, and where to start
looking for new blocks (mb_last_group) when allocating.
Now we only need to track s_mb_last_group and no longer need to track
s_mb_last_start, so we don't need the s_md_lock lock to ensure that the
two are consistent, and we can ensure that the s_mb_last_group read is up
to date by using smp_store_release/smp_load_acquire.
Besides, the s_mb_last_group data type only requires ext4_group_t
(i.e., unsigned int), rendering unsigned long superfluous.
Performance test data follows:
Test: Running will-it-scale/fallocate2 on CPU-bound containers.
Observation: Average fallocate operations per container per second.
| Kunpeng 920 / 512GB -P80| AMD 9654 / 1536GB -P96 |
Disk: 960GB SSD |-------------------------|-------------------------|
| base | patched | base | patched |
-------------------|-------|-----------------|-------|-----------------|
mb_optimize_scan=0 | 4821 | 7612 (+57.8%) | 15371 | 21647 (+40.8%) |
mb_optimize_scan=1 | 4784 | 7568 (+58.1%) | 6101 | 9117 (+49.4%) |
Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
---
fs/ext4/ext4.h | 2 +-
fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 17 ++++++-----------
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
index cfb60f8fbb63..93f03d8c3dca 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h
+++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
@@ -1630,7 +1630,7 @@ struct ext4_sb_info {
unsigned int s_mb_group_prealloc;
unsigned int s_max_dir_size_kb;
/* where last allocation was done - for stream allocation */
- unsigned long s_mb_last_group;
+ ext4_group_t s_mb_last_group;
unsigned int s_mb_prefetch;
unsigned int s_mb_prefetch_limit;
unsigned int s_mb_best_avail_max_trim_order;
diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index 5cdae3bda072..3f103919868b 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -2168,11 +2168,9 @@ static void ext4_mb_use_best_found(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
ac->ac_buddy_folio = e4b->bd_buddy_folio;
folio_get(ac->ac_buddy_folio);
/* store last allocated for subsequent stream allocation */
- if (ac->ac_flags & EXT4_MB_STREAM_ALLOC) {
- spin_lock(&sbi->s_md_lock);
- sbi->s_mb_last_group = ac->ac_f_ex.fe_group;
- spin_unlock(&sbi->s_md_lock);
- }
+ if (ac->ac_flags & EXT4_MB_STREAM_ALLOC)
+ /* pairs with smp_load_acquire in ext4_mb_regular_allocator() */
+ smp_store_release(&sbi->s_mb_last_group, ac->ac_f_ex.fe_group);
/*
* As we've just preallocated more space than
* user requested originally, we store allocated
@@ -2844,12 +2842,9 @@ ext4_mb_regular_allocator(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac)
}
/* if stream allocation is enabled, use global goal */
- if (ac->ac_flags & EXT4_MB_STREAM_ALLOC) {
- /* TBD: may be hot point */
- spin_lock(&sbi->s_md_lock);
- ac->ac_g_ex.fe_group = sbi->s_mb_last_group;
- spin_unlock(&sbi->s_md_lock);
- }
+ if (ac->ac_flags & EXT4_MB_STREAM_ALLOC)
+ /* pairs with smp_store_release in ext4_mb_use_best_found() */
+ ac->ac_g_ex.fe_group = smp_load_acquire(&sbi->s_mb_last_group);
/*
* Let's just scan groups to find more-less suitable blocks We
--
2.46.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-23 7:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-23 7:32 [PATCH v2 00/16] ext4: better scalability for ext4 block allocation Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 01/16] ext4: add ext4_try_lock_group() to skip busy groups Baokun Li
2025-06-27 18:06 ` Jan Kara
2025-07-14 6:53 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 02/16] ext4: remove unnecessary s_mb_last_start Baokun Li
2025-06-27 18:15 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-30 3:32 ` Baokun Li
2025-06-30 7:31 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-30 7:52 ` Baokun Li
2025-07-14 7:00 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-06-23 7:32 ` Baokun Li [this message]
2025-06-27 18:19 ` [PATCH v2 03/16] ext4: remove unnecessary s_md_lock on update s_mb_last_group Jan Kara
2025-06-30 3:48 ` Baokun Li
2025-06-30 7:47 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-30 9:21 ` Baokun Li
2025-06-30 16:32 ` Jan Kara
2025-07-01 2:39 ` Baokun Li
2025-07-01 12:21 ` Jan Kara
2025-07-01 13:17 ` Baokun Li
2025-07-08 13:08 ` Baokun Li
2025-07-10 14:38 ` Jan Kara
2025-07-14 3:01 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-07-14 7:00 ` Baokun Li
2025-07-01 2:57 ` kernel test robot
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 04/16] ext4: utilize multiple global goals to reduce contention Baokun Li
2025-06-27 18:31 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-30 6:50 ` Baokun Li
2025-06-30 8:38 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-30 10:02 ` Baokun Li
2025-06-30 17:41 ` Jan Kara
2025-07-01 3:32 ` Baokun Li
2025-07-01 11:53 ` Jan Kara
2025-07-01 12:12 ` Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 05/16] ext4: get rid of some obsolete EXT4_MB_HINT flags Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 06/16] ext4: fix typo in CR_GOAL_LEN_SLOW comment Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 07/16] ext4: convert sbi->s_mb_free_pending to atomic_t Baokun Li
2025-06-27 18:33 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 08/16] ext4: merge freed extent with existing extents before insertion Baokun Li
2025-06-27 19:11 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 09/16] ext4: fix zombie groups in average fragment size lists Baokun Li
2025-06-27 19:14 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-30 6:53 ` Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 10/16] ext4: fix largest free orders lists corruption on mb_optimize_scan switch Baokun Li
2025-06-27 19:34 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-30 7:34 ` Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:32 ` [PATCH v2 11/16] ext4: factor out __ext4_mb_scan_group() Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:33 ` [PATCH v2 12/16] ext4: factor out ext4_mb_might_prefetch() Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:33 ` [PATCH v2 13/16] ext4: factor out ext4_mb_scan_group() Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:33 ` [PATCH v2 14/16] ext4: convert free group lists to ordered xarrays Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:33 ` [PATCH v2 15/16] ext4: refactor choose group to scan group Baokun Li
2025-06-23 7:33 ` [PATCH v2 16/16] ext4: ensure global ordered traversal across all free groups xarrays Baokun Li
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=20250623073304.3275702-4-libaokun1@huawei.com \
--to=libaokun1@huawei.com \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@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