From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs-writeback: drop wb->list_lock during blk_finish_plug()
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2015 09:12:44 -0400
Message-ID: <20150913131244.GA15926@ret.masoncoding.com>
References: <CA+55aFw0JG5z-_h7MWMCUK1ZLi_sm+RsEq7=eoQGK2BQCamxXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFz2f8969nQAR6=TUTQOYA7T9vmcYJKGCyejYWYZ9a5S_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <55F33C2B.1010508@fb.com>
 <CA+55aFyK3Ua2ZcKLUBvESzxh=pH4x28QeijypJvSPiWbZStV-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFxpd0qrzb_4WamkYekiOXsi5Bs69kK8uj_Xg6MSYs4QtA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150911231636.GC4150@ret.masoncoding.com>
 <CA+55aFx=HdDMhK0bL8aNxOS83M3EOKGCLY59QzTF-jT+MPHXBw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150912230027.GE4150@ret.masoncoding.com>
 <CA+55aFzbniZkd4EegyKqNmyXWQF6dPypvdovP4K7RdeBrdZDVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150912234632.GF4150@ret.masoncoding.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150912234632.GF4150@ret.masoncoding.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 07:46:32PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> I don't think the XFS numbers can be trusted too much since it was
> basically bottlenecked behind that single pegged CPU.  It was bouncing
> around and I couldn't quite track it down to a process name (or perf
> profile).

I'll do more runs Monday, but I was able to grab a perf profile of the
pegged XFS CPU.  It was just the writeback worker thread, and it
hit btrfs differently because we defer more of this stuff to endio
workers, effectively spreading it out over more CPUs.

With 4 mount points intead of 2, XFS goes from 140K files/sec to 250K.
Here's one of the profiles, but it bounced around a lot so I wouldn't
use this to actually tune anything:

   11.42%  kworker/u82:61  [kernel.kallsyms]  [k] _raw_spin_lock
            |
            ---_raw_spin_lock
               |
               |--83.43%-- xfs_extent_busy_trim
               |          xfs_alloc_compute_aligned
               |          |
               |          |--99.92%-- xfs_alloc_ag_vextent_near
               |          |          xfs_alloc_ag_vextent
               |          |          xfs_alloc_vextent
               |          |          xfs_bmap_btalloc
               |          |          xfs_bmap_alloc
               |          |          xfs_bmapi_write
               |          |          xfs_iomap_write_allocate
               |          |          xfs_map_blocks
               |          |          xfs_vm_writepage
               |          |          __writepage
               |          |          write_cache_pages
               |          |          generic_writepages
               |          |          xfs_vm_writepages
               |          |          do_writepages
               |          |          __writeback_single_inode
               |          |          writeback_sb_inodes
               |          |          __writeback_inodes_wb
               |          |          wb_writeback
               |          |          wb_do_writeback
               |          |          wb_workfn
               |          |          process_one_work
               |          |          worker_thread
               |          |          kthread
               |          |          ret_from_fork
               |           --0.08%-- [...]
               |