From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>,
Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>,
Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH V4 6/6] loop: add hint for handling aio via IOCB_NOWAIT
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2025 21:29:25 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250928132927.3672537-7-ming.lei@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250928132927.3672537-1-ming.lei@redhat.com>
Add hint for using IOCB_NOWAIT to handle loop aio command for avoiding
to cause write(especially randwrite) perf regression on sparse backed file.
Try IOCB_NOWAIT in the following situations:
- backing file is block device
OR
- READ aio command
OR
- there isn't any queued blocking async WRITEs, because NOWAIT won't cause
contention with blocking WRITE, which often implies exclusive lock
With this simple policy, perf regression of randwrite/write on sparse
backing file is fixed.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/dm-devel/7d6ae2c9-df8e-50d0-7ad6-b787cb3cfab4@redhat.com/
Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
---
drivers/block/loop.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 61 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
index 57e33553695b..911262b648ce 100644
--- a/drivers/block/loop.c
+++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
@@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ struct loop_device {
struct rb_root worker_tree;
struct timer_list timer;
bool sysfs_inited;
+ unsigned lo_nr_blocking_writes;
struct request_queue *lo_queue;
struct blk_mq_tag_set tag_set;
@@ -462,6 +463,33 @@ static int lo_rw_aio(struct loop_device *lo, struct loop_cmd *cmd,
return -EIOCBQUEUED;
}
+static inline bool lo_aio_try_nowait(struct loop_device *lo,
+ struct loop_cmd *cmd)
+{
+ struct file *file = lo->lo_backing_file;
+ struct inode *inode = file->f_mapping->host;
+ struct request *rq = blk_mq_rq_from_pdu(cmd);
+
+ /* NOWAIT works fine for backing block device */
+ if (S_ISBLK(inode->i_mode))
+ return true;
+
+ /*
+ * NOWAIT is supposed to be fine for READ without contending with
+ * blocking WRITE
+ */
+ if (req_op(rq) == REQ_OP_READ)
+ return true;
+
+ /*
+ * If there is any queued non-NOWAIT async WRITE , don't try new
+ * NOWAIT WRITE for avoiding contention
+ *
+ * Here we focus on handling stable FS block mapping via NOWAIT
+ */
+ return READ_ONCE(lo->lo_nr_blocking_writes) == 0;
+}
+
static int lo_rw_aio_nowait(struct loop_device *lo, struct loop_cmd *cmd,
int rw)
{
@@ -473,6 +501,9 @@ static int lo_rw_aio_nowait(struct loop_device *lo, struct loop_cmd *cmd,
if (unlikely(ret))
goto fail;
+ if (!lo_aio_try_nowait(lo, cmd))
+ return -EAGAIN;
+
cmd->iocb.ki_flags |= IOCB_NOWAIT;
ret = lo_submit_rw_aio(lo, cmd, nr_bvec, rw);
fail:
@@ -773,12 +804,19 @@ static ssize_t loop_attr_dio_show(struct loop_device *lo, char *buf)
return sysfs_emit(buf, "%s\n", dio ? "1" : "0");
}
+static ssize_t loop_attr_nr_blocking_writes_show(struct loop_device *lo,
+ char *buf)
+{
+ return sysfs_emit(buf, "%u\n", lo->lo_nr_blocking_writes);
+}
+
LOOP_ATTR_RO(backing_file);
LOOP_ATTR_RO(offset);
LOOP_ATTR_RO(sizelimit);
LOOP_ATTR_RO(autoclear);
LOOP_ATTR_RO(partscan);
LOOP_ATTR_RO(dio);
+LOOP_ATTR_RO(nr_blocking_writes);
static struct attribute *loop_attrs[] = {
&loop_attr_backing_file.attr,
@@ -787,6 +825,7 @@ static struct attribute *loop_attrs[] = {
&loop_attr_autoclear.attr,
&loop_attr_partscan.attr,
&loop_attr_dio.attr,
+ &loop_attr_nr_blocking_writes.attr,
NULL,
};
@@ -862,6 +901,24 @@ static inline int queue_on_root_worker(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css)
}
#endif
+static inline void loop_inc_blocking_writes(struct loop_device *lo,
+ struct loop_cmd *cmd)
+{
+ lockdep_assert_held(&lo->lo_mutex);
+
+ if (req_op(blk_mq_rq_from_pdu(cmd)) == REQ_OP_WRITE)
+ lo->lo_nr_blocking_writes += 1;
+}
+
+static inline void loop_dec_blocking_writes(struct loop_device *lo,
+ struct loop_cmd *cmd)
+{
+ lockdep_assert_held(&lo->lo_mutex);
+
+ if (req_op(blk_mq_rq_from_pdu(cmd)) == REQ_OP_WRITE)
+ lo->lo_nr_blocking_writes -= 1;
+}
+
static void loop_queue_work(struct loop_device *lo, struct loop_cmd *cmd)
{
struct request __maybe_unused *rq = blk_mq_rq_from_pdu(cmd);
@@ -944,6 +1001,8 @@ static void loop_queue_work(struct loop_device *lo, struct loop_cmd *cmd)
work = &lo->rootcg_work;
cmd_list = &lo->rootcg_cmd_list;
}
+ if (cmd->use_aio)
+ loop_inc_blocking_writes(lo, cmd);
list_add_tail(&cmd->list_entry, cmd_list);
queue_work(lo->workqueue, work);
spin_unlock_irq(&lo->lo_work_lock);
@@ -2042,6 +2101,8 @@ static void loop_process_work(struct loop_worker *worker,
cond_resched();
spin_lock_irq(&lo->lo_work_lock);
+ if (cmd->use_aio)
+ loop_dec_blocking_writes(lo, cmd);
}
/*
--
2.47.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-28 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-28 13:29 [PATCH V4 0/6] loop: improve loop aio perf by IOCB_NOWAIT Ming Lei
2025-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH V4 1/6] loop: add helper lo_cmd_nr_bvec() Ming Lei
2025-10-03 7:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH V4 2/6] loop: add helper lo_rw_aio_prep() Ming Lei
2025-10-03 7:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH V4 3/6] loop: add lo_submit_rw_aio() Ming Lei
2025-10-03 7:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH V4 4/6] loop: move command blkcg/memcg initialization into loop_queue_work Ming Lei
2025-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH V4 5/6] loop: try to handle loop aio command via NOWAIT IO first Ming Lei
2025-09-29 6:44 ` Yu Kuai
2025-09-29 9:18 ` Ming Lei
2025-09-28 13:29 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2025-10-03 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 6/6] loop: add hint for handling aio via IOCB_NOWAIT Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-06 14:18 ` Ming Lei
2025-10-07 6:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-07 12:15 ` Ming Lei
2025-10-08 5:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-09 1:25 ` Ming Lei
2025-10-13 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-13 8:26 ` Ming Lei
2025-09-28 18:42 ` [syzbot ci] Re: loop: improve loop aio perf by IOCB_NOWAIT syzbot ci
2025-09-29 1:13 ` Ming Lei
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=20250928132927.3672537-7-ming.lei@redhat.com \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
--cc=zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.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).