linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
	Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/18] writeback: dirty position control - bdi reserve area
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 22:37:21 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110918143721.GA17240@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110918141705.GB15366@localhost>

On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:17:05PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 06:19:38PM +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 20:31 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > > > +   x_intercept = min(write_bw, freerun);
> > > > > +   if (bdi_dirty < x_intercept) {
> > > > 
> > > > So the point of the freerun point is that we never throttle before it,
> > > > so basically all the below shouldn't be needed at all, right? 
> > > 
> > > Yes!
> > > 
> > > > > +           if (bdi_dirty > x_intercept / 8) {
> > > > > +                   pos_ratio *= x_intercept;
> > > > > +                   do_div(pos_ratio, bdi_dirty);
> > > > > +           } else
> > > > > +                   pos_ratio *= 8;
> > > > > +   }
> > > > > +
> > > > >     return pos_ratio;
> > > > >  }
> > 
> > Does that mean we can remove this whole block?
> 
> Right, if the bdi freerun concept is proved to work fine.
> 
> Unfortunately I find it mostly yields lower performance than bdi
> reserve area. Patch is attached. If you would like me try other
> patches, I can easily kick off new tests and redo the comparison.
> 
> Here is the nr_written numbers over various JBOD test cases,
> the larger, the better:
> 
> bdi-reserve     bdi-freerun    diff    case
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 38375271        31553807      -17.8%	JBOD-10HDD-6G/xfs-100dd-1M-16p-5895M-20
> 30478879        28631491       -6.1%	JBOD-10HDD-6G/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-20
> 29735407        28871956       -2.9%	JBOD-10HDD-6G/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-20
> 30850350        28344165       -8.1%	JBOD-10HDD-6G/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-20
> 17706200        16174684       -8.6%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=100M/xfs-100dd-1M-16p-5895M-100M
> 23374918        14376942      -38.5%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=100M/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-100M
> 20659278        19640375       -4.9%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=100M/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-100M
> 22517497        14552321      -35.4%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=100M/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-100M
> 68287850        61078553      -10.6%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=2G/xfs-100dd-1M-16p-5895M-2048M
> 33835247        32018425       -5.4%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=2G/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-2048M
> 30187817        29942083       -0.8%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=2G/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-2048M
> 30563144        30204022       -1.2%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=2G/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-2048M
> 34476862        34645398       +0.5%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=4G/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-4096M
> 30326479        30097263       -0.8%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=4G/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-4096M
> 30446767        30339683       -0.4%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=4G/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-4096M
> 40793956        45936678      +12.6%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=800M/xfs-100dd-1M-16p-5895M-800M
> 27481305        24867282       -9.5%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=800M/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-800M
> 25651257        22507406      -12.3%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=800M/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-800M
> 19849350        21298787       +7.3%	JBOD-10HDD-thresh=800M/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-800M

BTW, I also compared the IO-less patchset and the vanilla kernel's
JBOD performance. Basically, the performance is lightly improved
under large memory, and reduced a lot in small memory servers.

 vanillla IO-less  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 31189025 34476862      +10.5%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=4G/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-4096M
 30441974 30326479       -0.4%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=4G/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-4096M
 30484578 30446767       -0.1%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=4G/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-4096M

 68532421 68287850       -0.4%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=2G/xfs-100dd-1M-16p-5895M-2048M
 31606793 33835247       +7.1%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=2G/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-2048M
 30404955 30187817       -0.7%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=2G/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-2048M
 30425591 30563144       +0.5%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=2G/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-2048M

 40451069 38375271       -5.1%  JBOD-10HDD-6G/xfs-100dd-1M-16p-5895M-20
 30903629 30478879       -1.4%  JBOD-10HDD-6G/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-20
 30113560 29735407       -1.3%  JBOD-10HDD-6G/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-20
 30181418 30850350       +2.2%  JBOD-10HDD-6G/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-20

 46067335 40793956      -11.4%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=800M/xfs-100dd-1M-16p-5895M-800M
 30425063 27481305       -9.7%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=800M/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-800M
 28437929 25651257       -9.8%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=800M/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-800M
 29409406 19849350      -32.5%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=800M/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-800M

 26508063 17706200      -33.2%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=100M/xfs-100dd-1M-16p-5895M-100M
 23767810 23374918       -1.7%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=100M/xfs-10dd-1M-16p-5895M-100M
 28032891 20659278      -26.3%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=100M/xfs-1dd-1M-16p-5895M-100M
 26049973 22517497      -13.6%  JBOD-10HDD-thresh=100M/xfs-2dd-1M-16p-5895M-100M

There are still some itches in JBOD..

Thanks,
Fengguang

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2011-09-18 14:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-04  1:53 [PATCH 00/18] IO-less dirty throttling v11 Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 01/18] writeback: account per-bdi accumulated dirtied pages Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 02/18] writeback: dirty position control Wu Fengguang
2011-09-05 15:02   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-06  2:10     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-05 15:05   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-06  2:43     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 18:20   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-09-08  2:53     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-11-12  5:44   ` Nai Xia
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 03/18] writeback: dirty rate control Wu Fengguang
2011-09-29 11:57   ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 04/18] writeback: stabilize bdi->dirty_ratelimit Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 05/18] writeback: per task dirty rate limit Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 15:47   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-06 23:27     ` Jan Kara
2011-09-06 23:34       ` Jan Kara
2011-09-07  7:27       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07  1:04     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07  7:31       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 11:00         ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 06/18] writeback: IO-less balance_dirty_pages() Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 12:13   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07  2:46     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 07/18] writeback: dirty ratelimit - think time compensation Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 08/18] writeback: trace dirty_ratelimit Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 09/18] writeback: trace balance_dirty_pages Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 10/18] writeback: dirty position control - bdi reserve area Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 14:09   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 12:31     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-12 10:19       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-18 14:17         ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-18 14:37           ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2011-09-18 14:47             ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-28 14:02               ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-28 14:50                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-29  3:32                   ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-29  8:49                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-29 11:05                       ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-29 12:15                 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 11/18] block: add bdi flag to indicate risk of io queue underrun Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 14:22   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07  2:37     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07  7:31       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 12/18] writeback: balanced_rate cannot exceed write bandwidth Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 13/18] writeback: limit max dirty pause time Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 14:52   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07  2:35     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-12 10:22       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-18 14:23         ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 14/18] writeback: control " Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 15:51   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07  2:02     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-12 10:28       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 15/18] writeback: charge leaked page dirties to active tasks Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 16:16   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07  9:06     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07  0:17   ` Jan Kara
2011-09-07  9:37     ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 16/18] writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on sub-page writes Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 17/18] writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on redirty Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 16:18   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07  0:22     ` Jan Kara
2011-09-07  1:18       ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07  6:56       ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-07  8:19         ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 16:42           ` Jan Kara
2011-09-07 16:46             ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-08  8:51               ` Steven Whitehouse
2011-09-04  1:53 ` [PATCH 18/18] btrfs: fix dirtied pages accounting on sub-page writes Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07 13:32 ` [PATCH 00/18] IO-less dirty throttling v11 Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07 19:14   ` Trond Myklebust
2011-09-28 14:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-29  4:11   ` Wu Fengguang

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=20110918143721.GA17240@localhost \
    --to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arighi@develer.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=gthelen@google.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).