public inbox for linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>, <tytso@mit.edu>,
	<adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>, <ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <yi.zhang@huawei.com>,
	<yangerkun@huawei.com>, Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] ext4: utilize multiple global goals to reduce contention
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:32:23 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4cbb9bc3-617d-43f7-a1cd-9afbd864fc68@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <trjf7lqckchx6bc3p4lwh5yy3bqczo6yvdll7ujguhvvezwtja@cpfhj6ai7gzp>

On 2025/7/1 1:41, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 30-06-25 18:02:49, Baokun Li wrote:
>> On 2025/6/30 16:38, Jan Kara wrote:
>>> We could make streaming goal to be ext4_fsblk_t so that also offset of the
>>> last big allocation in the group is recorded as I wrote above. That would
>>> tend to pack big allocations in each group together which is benefitial to
>>> combat fragmentation even with higher proportion of groups that are streaming
>>> goals (and likely becomes more important as the blocksize and thus group
>>> size grow). We can discuss proper number of slots for streaming allocation
>>> (I'm not hung up on it being quarter of the group count) but I'm convinced
>>> sb->s_groups_count is too much :)
>>>
>>> 								Honza
>> I think sbi->s_groups_count / 4 is indeed acceptable. However, I don't
>> believe recording offsets is necessary. As groups become larger,
>> contention for groups will intensify, and adding offsets would only
>> make this contention worse.
> I agree the contention for groups will increase when the group count goes
> down. I just thought offsets may help to find free space faster in large
> groups (and thus reduce contention) and also reduce free space
> fragmentation within a group (by having higher chances of placing large
> allocations close together within a group) but maybe that's not the case.
> Offsets are definitely not requirement at this point.
>
> 								Honza
>
Thinking this over, with LBS support coming, if our block size jumps from
4KB to 64KB, the maximum group size will dramatically increase from 128MB
to 32GB (even with the current 4GB group limit). If free space within a
group gets heavily fragmented, iterating through that single group could
become quite time-consuming.

Your idea of recording offsets to prevent redundant scanning of
already-checked extents within a group definitely makes sense. But with
reference to the idea of optimizing linear traversal of groups, I think it
might be better to record the offset of the first occurrence of each order
in the same way that bb_counters records the number of each order.


Cheers,
Baokun


  reply	other threads:[~2025-07-01  3:32 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 ` [PATCH v2 03/16] ext4: remove unnecessary s_md_lock on update s_mb_last_group Baokun Li
2025-06-27 18:19   ` 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 [this message]
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=4cbb9bc3-617d-43f7-a1cd-9afbd864fc68@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