From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
NFS list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
open-osd <osd-dev@open-osd.org>
Cc: Benny Halevy <bhalevy@tonian.com>, Peng Tao <bergwolf@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 6/6] pnfs-obj: Better IO pattern in case of unaligned offset
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 15:21:12 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FD1EE38.5080300@panasas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FD1CEA8.3090105@panasas.com>
Depending on layout and ARCH, ORE has some limits on max IO sizes
which is communicated on (what else) ore_layout->max_io_length,
which is always stripe aligned.
This was considered as the pg_test boundary for splitting and starting
a new IO.
But in the case of a long IO where the start offset is not aligned
what would happen is that both end of IO[N] and start of IO[N+1]
would be unaligned, causing each IO boundary parity unit to be
calculated and written twice.
So what we do in this patch is split the very start of an unaligned
IO, up to a stripe boundary, and then next IO's can continue fully
aligned til the end.
We might be sacrificing the case where the full unaligned IO would
fit within a single max_io_length, but the sacrifice is well worth
the elimination of double calculation and parity units IO.
Actually the sacrificing is marginal and is almost unmeasurable.
TODO:
If we know the total expected linear segment that will
be received, at pg_init, we could use that information
in many places:
1. blocks-layout get_layout write segment size
2. Better mds-threshold
3. In above situation for a better clean split
I will do this in future submission.
Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
---
fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c b/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c
index 422bdef..5f8c4f3 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/objlayout/objio_osd.c
@@ -576,17 +576,66 @@ static bool objio_pg_test(struct nfs_pageio_descriptor *pgio,
return false;
return pgio->pg_count + req->wb_bytes <=
- OBJIO_LSEG(pgio->pg_lseg)->layout.max_io_length;
+ (unsigned long)pgio->pg_layout_private;
+}
+
+void objio_init_read(struct nfs_pageio_descriptor *pgio, struct nfs_page *req)
+{
+ pnfs_generic_pg_init_read(pgio, req);
+ if (unlikely(pgio->pg_lseg == NULL))
+ return; /* Not pNFS */
+
+ pgio->pg_layout_private = (void *)
+ OBJIO_LSEG(pgio->pg_lseg)->layout.max_io_length;
+}
+
+static bool aligned_on_raid_stripe(u64 offset, struct ore_layout *layout,
+ unsigned long *stripe_end)
+{
+ u32 stripe_off;
+ unsigned stripe_size;
+
+ if (layout->raid_algorithm == PNFS_OSD_RAID_0)
+ return true;
+
+ stripe_size = layout->stripe_unit *
+ (layout->group_width - layout->parity);
+
+ div_u64_rem(offset, stripe_size, &stripe_off);
+ if (!stripe_off)
+ return true;
+
+ *stripe_end = stripe_size - stripe_off;
+ return false;
+}
+
+void objio_init_write(struct nfs_pageio_descriptor *pgio, struct nfs_page *req)
+{
+ unsigned long stripe_end = 0;
+
+ pnfs_generic_pg_init_write(pgio, req);
+ if (unlikely(pgio->pg_lseg == NULL))
+ return; /* Not pNFS */
+
+ if (req->wb_offset ||
+ !aligned_on_raid_stripe(req->wb_index * PAGE_SIZE,
+ &OBJIO_LSEG(pgio->pg_lseg)->layout,
+ &stripe_end)) {
+ pgio->pg_layout_private = (void *)stripe_end;
+ } else {
+ pgio->pg_layout_private = (void *)
+ OBJIO_LSEG(pgio->pg_lseg)->layout.max_io_length;
+ }
}
static const struct nfs_pageio_ops objio_pg_read_ops = {
- .pg_init = pnfs_generic_pg_init_read,
+ .pg_init = objio_init_read,
.pg_test = objio_pg_test,
.pg_doio = pnfs_generic_pg_readpages,
};
static const struct nfs_pageio_ops objio_pg_write_ops = {
- .pg_init = pnfs_generic_pg_init_write,
+ .pg_init = objio_init_write,
.pg_test = objio_pg_test,
.pg_doio = pnfs_generic_pg_writepages,
};
--
1.7.10.2.677.gb6bc67f
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-08 12:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-08 10:06 [RFC 0/5] CRASHFIX: pnfs-obj: NONE-RPC LD must not call rpc_restart_call_prepare() Boaz Harrosh
2012-06-08 12:06 ` [PATCH 1/6] ore: Fix NFS crash by supporting any unaligned RAID IO Boaz Harrosh
2012-06-08 12:09 ` [PATCH 2/6] ore: Remove support of partial IO request (NFS crash) Boaz Harrosh
2012-06-08 12:13 ` [PATCH 3/6] pnfs-obj: Fix __r4w_get_page when offset is beyond i_size Boaz Harrosh
2012-06-13 13:53 ` Peng Tao
2012-06-08 12:14 ` [PATCH 4/6] pnfs-obj: don't leak objio_state if ore_write/read fails Boaz Harrosh
2012-06-08 12:15 ` [PATCH 5/6] NFS41: add pg_layout_private to nfs_pageio_descriptor Boaz Harrosh
2012-06-08 12:21 ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
2012-06-13 13:57 ` [RFC 0/5] CRASHFIX: pnfs-obj: NONE-RPC LD must not call rpc_restart_call_prepare() Peng Tao
2012-07-12 14:11 ` Boaz Harrosh
2012-07-18 23:07 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-07-19 9:48 ` Boaz Harrosh
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=4FD1EE38.5080300@panasas.com \
--to=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=bergwolf@gmail.com \
--cc=bhalevy@tonian.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=osd-dev@open-osd.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).