From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] mm: kick writeback flusher for IOCB_DONTCACHE with targeted dirty tracking
Date: Fri, 8 May 2026 17:20:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260508172014.8265ddc0220ff7e4d54674ff@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260505-dontcache-v6-2-66463805dd6a@kernel.org>
On Tue, 05 May 2026 20:59:49 +0200 Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> wrote:
> The IOCB_DONTCACHE writeback path in generic_write_sync() calls
> filemap_flush_range() on every write, submitting writeback inline in
> the writer's context. Perf lock contention profiling shows the
> performance problem is not lock contention but the writeback submission
> work itself — walking the page tree and submitting I/O blocks the writer
> for milliseconds, inflating p99.9 latency from 23ms (buffered) to 93ms
> (dontcache).
>
> Replace the inline filemap_flush_range() call with a flusher kick that
> drains dirty pages in the background. This moves writeback submission
> completely off the writer's hot path.
>
> ...
>
> Before After Change
> seq-write/dontcache 298 897 +201%
> rand-write/dontcache 131 236 +80%
>
> Tail latency improvements (seq-write/dontcache):
> p99: 135,266 us -> 23,986 us (-82%)
> p99.9: 8,925,479 us -> 28,443 us (-99.7%)
>
> Multi-writer (4 jobs, sequential write):
> Before After Change
> dontcache aggregate (MB/s) 2,529 4,532 +79%
> dontcache p99 (us) 8,553 1,002 -88%
> dontcache p99.9 (us) 109,314 1,057 -99%
>
> 32-file write (Axboe test):
> Before After Change
> dontcache aggregate (MB/s) 1,548 3,499 +126%
> dontcache p99 (us) 10,170 602 -94%
> Peak dirty pages (MB) 1,837 213 -88%
>
> Dontcache now reaches 81% of buffered throughput (was 35%).
>
> Competing writers (dontcache vs buffered, separate files):
> Before After
> buffered writer 868 433 MB/s
> dontcache writer 415 433 MB/s
> Aggregate 1,284 866 MB/s
>
> ...
>
> The dontcache writer's p99.9 latency collapsed from 119 ms to
> 33 ms (-73%), eliminating the severe periodic stalls seen in the
> baseline. Both writers now share identical latency profiles,
> matching the buffered-vs-buffered pattern.
>
> The per-bdi_writeback dirty tracking dramatically reduces peak dirty
> pages in dontcache workloads, with the 32-file test dropping from
> 1.8 GB to 213 MB. Dontcache sequential write throughput triples and
> multi-writer throughput reaches parity with buffered I/O, with tail
> latencies collapsing by 1-2 orders of magnitude.
Geeze, is that the best you can do ;)
Sashiko seems to have found more stuff:
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260505-dontcache-v6-0-66463805dd6a@kernel.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-09 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-05 18:59 [PATCH v6 0/2] mm: improve write performance with RWF_DONTCACHE Jeff Layton
2026-05-05 18:59 ` [PATCH v6 1/2] mm: track DONTCACHE dirty pages per bdi_writeback Jeff Layton
2026-05-06 10:32 ` Jan Kara
2026-05-05 18:59 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] mm: kick writeback flusher for IOCB_DONTCACHE with targeted dirty tracking Jeff Layton
2026-05-06 10:43 ` Jan Kara
2026-05-09 0:20 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2026-05-09 10:19 ` Jeff Layton
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=20260508172014.8265ddc0220ff7e4d54674ff@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=snitzer@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.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