linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: ext4 development <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH (RESEND)] don't scan/accumulate more pages than mballoc will allocate
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:29:37 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BB0C761.50204@redhat.com> (raw)

(resend, email sent Friday seems lost)

There was a bug reported on RHEL5 that a 10G dd on a 12G box
had a very, very slow sync after that.

At issue was the loop in write_cache_pages scanning all the way
to the end of the 10G file, even though the subsequent call
to mpage_da_submit_io would only actually write a smallish amt; then
we went back to the write_cache_pages loop ... wasting tons of time
in calling __mpage_da_writepage for thousands of pages we would
just revisit (many times) later.

Upstream it's not such a big issue for sys_sync because we get
to the loop with a much smaller nr_to_write, which limits the loop.

However, talking with Aneesh he realized that fsync upstream still
gets here with a very large nr_to_write and we face the same problem.

This patch makes mpage_add_bh_to_extent stop the loop after we've
accumulated 2048 pages, by setting mpd->io_done = 1; which ultimately
causes the write_cache_pages loop to break.

Repeating the test with a dirty_ratio of 80 (to leave something for
fsync to do), I don't see huge IO performance gains, but the reduction
in cpu usage is striking: 80% usage with stock, and 2% with the
below patch.  Instrumenting the loop in write_cache_pages clearly
shows that we are wasting time here.

It'd be better to not have a magic number of 2048 in here, so I'll
look for a cleaner way to get this info out of mballoc; I still need
to look at what Aneesh has in the patch queue, that might help.
This is something we could probably put in for now, though; the 2048
is already enshrined in a comment in inode.c, at least.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
---

Index: linux-2.6/fs/ext4/inode.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/fs/ext4/inode.c
+++ linux-2.6/fs/ext4/inode.c
@@ -2318,6 +2318,10 @@ static void mpage_add_bh_to_extent(struc
 	sector_t next;
 	int nrblocks = mpd->b_size >> mpd->inode->i_blkbits;
 
+	/* Don't go larger than mballoc is willing to allocate */
+	if (nrblocks >= 2048)
+		goto flush_it;
+
 	/* check if thereserved journal credits might overflow */
 	if (!(EXT4_I(mpd->inode)->i_flags & EXT4_EXTENTS_FL)) {
 		if (nrblocks >= EXT4_MAX_TRANS_DATA) {


             reply	other threads:[~2010-03-29 15:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-29 15:29 Eric Sandeen [this message]
2010-04-05 13:11 ` [PATCH (RESEND)] don't scan/accumulate more pages than mballoc will allocate tytso
2010-04-05 14:42   ` Eric Sandeen
2010-04-08  2:10     ` [PATCH] ext4: " Theodore Ts'o
2010-04-08  2:31       ` Eric Sandeen

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=4BB0C761.50204@redhat.com \
    --to=sandeen@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).