linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>
To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huaweicloud.com>,
	Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 01/12] Revert "ext4: remove ac->ac_found > sbi->s_mb_min_to_scan dead check in ext4_mb_check_limits"
Date: Tue, 30 May 2023 18:03:39 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ddcae9658e46880dfec2fb0aa61d01fb3353d202.1685449706.git.ojaswin@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1685449706.git.ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>

This reverts commit 32c0869370194ae5ac9f9f501953ef693040f6a1.

The reverted commit was intended to remove a dead check however it was observed
that this check was actually being used to exit early instead of looping
sbi->s_mb_max_to_scan times when we are able to find a free extent bigger than
the goal extent. Due to this, a my performance tests (fsmark, parallel file
writes in a highly fragmented FS) were seeing a 2x-3x regression.

Example, the default value of the following variables is:

sbi->s_mb_max_to_scan = 200
sbi->s_mb_min_to_scan = 10

In ext4_mb_check_limits() if we find an extent smaller than goal, then we return
early and try again. This loop will go on until we have processed
sbi->s_mb_max_to_scan(=200) number of free extents at which point we exit and
just use whatever we have even if it is smaller than goal extent.

Now, the regression comes when we find an extent bigger than goal. Earlier, in
this case we would loop only sbi->s_mb_min_to_scan(=10) times and then just use
the bigger extent. However with commit 32c08693 that check was removed and hence
we would loop sbi->s_mb_max_to_scan(=200) times even though we have a big enough
free extent to satisfy the request. The only time we would exit early would be
when the free extent is *exactly* the size of our goal, which is pretty uncommon
occurrence and so we would almost always end up looping 200 times.

Hence, revert the commit by adding the check back to fix the regression. Also
add a comment to outline this policy.

Signed-off-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huaweicloud.com>
---
 fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index d4b6a2c1881d..7ac6d3524f29 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -2063,7 +2063,7 @@ static void ext4_mb_check_limits(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
 	if (bex->fe_len < gex->fe_len)
 		return;
 
-	if (finish_group)
+	if (finish_group || ac->ac_found > sbi->s_mb_min_to_scan)
 		ext4_mb_use_best_found(ac, e4b);
 }
 
@@ -2075,6 +2075,20 @@ static void ext4_mb_check_limits(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
  * in the context. Later, the best found extent will be used, if
  * mballoc can't find good enough extent.
  *
+ * The algorithm used is roughly as follows:
+ *
+ * * If free extent found is exactly as big as goal, then
+ *   stop the scan and use it immediately
+ *
+ * * If free extent found is smaller than goal, then keep retrying
+ *   upto a max of sbi->s_mb_max_to_scan times (default 200). After
+ *   that stop scanning and use whatever we have.
+ *
+ * * If free extent found is bigger than goal, then keep retrying
+ *   upto a max of sbi->s_mb_min_to_scan times (default 10) before
+ *   stopping the scan and using the extent.
+ *
+ *
  * FIXME: real allocation policy is to be designed yet!
  */
 static void ext4_mb_measure_extent(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
-- 
2.31.1


  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-30 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-30 12:33 [PATCH v2 00/12] multiblock allocator improvements Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-05-30 12:33 ` Ojaswin Mujoo [this message]
2023-05-30 16:28   ` [PATCH v2 01/12] Revert "ext4: remove ac->ac_found > sbi->s_mb_min_to_scan dead check in ext4_mb_check_limits" Sedat Dilek
2023-05-31  8:57     ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-06-02 13:45       ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2023-06-02 16:45         ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] ext4: mballoc: Remove useless setting of ac_criteria Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] ext4: Remove unused extern variables declaration Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] ext4: Convert mballoc cr (criteria) to enum Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-06-06 13:13   ` Jan Kara
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] ext4: Add per CR extent scanned counter Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] ext4: Add counter to track successful allocation of goal length Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] ext4: Avoid scanning smaller extents in BG during CR1 Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] ext4: Don't skip prefetching BLOCK_UNINIT groups Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] ext4: Ensure ext4_mb_prefetch_fini() is called for all prefetched BGs Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-06-06 14:00   ` Guoqing Jiang
2023-06-27  6:51     ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-06-28  1:33       ` Guoqing Jiang
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] ext4: Abstract out logic to search average fragment list Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] ext4: Add allocation criteria 1.5 (CR1_5) Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-06-07 10:21   ` Jan Kara
2023-06-08 14:45     ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-06-09 10:57       ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-05-30 12:33 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] ext4: Give symbolic names to mballoc criterias Ojaswin Mujoo
2023-06-07 10:39   ` Jan Kara
2023-06-09  3:14 ` [PATCH v2 00/12] multiblock allocator improvements 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=ddcae9658e46880dfec2fb0aa61d01fb3353d202.1685449706.git.ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=riteshh@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=shikemeng@huaweicloud.com \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).