From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm: implement write-behind policy for sequential file writes
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 14:00:01 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <eb9447b7-9fca-5883-8f04-1fdc7db31c20@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <150693809463.587641.5712378065494786263.stgit@buzz>
On 10/02/2017 03:54 AM, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> Traditional writeback tries to accumulate as much dirty data as possible.
> This is worth strategy for extremely short-living files and for batching
> writes for saving battery power. But for workloads where disk latency is
> important this policy generates periodic disk load spikes which increases
> latency for concurrent operations.
>
> Present writeback engine allows to tune only dirty data size or expiration
> time. Such tuning cannot eliminate pikes - this just lowers and multiplies
> them. Other option is switching into sync mode which flushes written data
> right after each write, obviously this have significant performance impact.
> Such tuning is system-wide and affects memory-mapped and randomly written
> files, flusher threads handle them much better.
>
> This patch implements write-behind policy which tracks sequential writes
> and starts background writeback when have enough dirty pages in a row.
This is a great idea in general. My only concerns would be around cases
where we don't expect the writes to ever make it to media. It's not an
uncommon use case - app dirties some memory in a file, and expects
to truncate/unlink it before it makes it to disk. We don't want to trigger
writeback for those. Arguably that should be app hinted.
> Write-behind tracks current writing position and looks into two windows
> behind it: first represents unwitten pages, Second - async writeback.
>
> Next write starts background writeback when first window exceed threshold
> and waits for pages falling behind async writeback window. This allows to
> combine small writes into bigger requests and maintain optimal io-depth.
>
> This affects only writes via syscalls, memory mapped writes are unchanged.
> Also write-behind doesn't affect files with fadvise POSIX_FADV_RANDOM.
>
> If async window set to 0 then write-behind skips dirty pages for congested
> disk and never wait for writeback. This is used for files with O_NONBLOCK.
>
> Also for files with fadvise POSIX_FADV_NOREUSE write-behind automatically
> evicts completely written pages from cache. This is perfect for writing
> verbose logs without pushing more important data out of cache.
>
> As a bonus write-behind makes blkio throttling much more smooth for most
> bulk file operations like copying or downloading which writes sequentially.
>
> Size of minimal write-behind request is set in:
> /sys/block/$DISK/bdi/min_write_behind_kb
> Default is 256Kb, 0 - disable write-behind for this disk.
>
> Size of async window set in:
> /sys/block/$DISK/bdi/async_write_behind_kb
> Default is 1024Kb, 0 - disables sync write-behind.
Should we expose these, or just make them a function of the IO limitations
exposed by the device? Something like 2x max request size, or similar.
Finally, do you have any test results?
--
Jens Axboe
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-02 20:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-02 9:54 [PATCH RFC] mm: implement write-behind policy for sequential file writes Konstantin Khlebnikov
2017-10-02 11:23 ` Florian Weimer
2017-10-02 11:55 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2017-10-02 19:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-02 20:58 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2017-10-02 22:29 ` Andreas Dilger
2017-10-02 22:45 ` Dave Chinner
2017-10-02 23:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-03 0:08 ` Dave Chinner
2017-10-02 20:00 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2017-10-02 21:50 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
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=eb9447b7-9fca-5883-8f04-1fdc7db31c20@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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).