public inbox for linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


  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