From: majianpeng <majianpeng@gmail.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@gmail.com>
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>,
linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>, shli <shli@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH V1] raidd5:Only move IO_THRESHOLD stripes from delay_list to hold_list once.
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:09:54 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201207160909343901731@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: CAA9_cmcLEYeu9VaVTgVW=CX+JvTyA_ubAmrAkpQdxGmRkGj_3A@mail.gmail.com
On 2012-07-14 07:56 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@gmail.com> Wrote:
>[ adding Shaohua ]
>
>On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 3:31 AM, majianpeng <majianpeng@gmail.com> wrote:
>> To improve write perfomance by decreasing the preread stripe,only move
>> IO_THRESHOLD stripes from delay_list to hold_list once.
>>
>> Using the follow command:
>> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/md0 bs=2M count=52100.
>>
>> At default condition: speed is 95MB/s.
>> At the condition of preread_bypass_threshold was equal zero:speed is 105MB/s.
>> Using this patch:speed is 123MB/s.
>>
>> If preread_bypass_threshold was zero,the performance will be better,but
>> not better than this patch.
>> I think maybe two reason:
>> 1:If bio is REQ_SYNC
>> 2:In function __get_priority_stripe():
>>>> } else if (!list_empty(&conf->hold_list) &&
>>>> ((conf->bypass_threshold &&
>>>> conf->bypass_count > conf->bypass_threshold) ||
>>>> atomic_read(&conf->pending_full_writes) == 0)) {
>> Preread_bypass_threshold is one condition of getting stripe from
>> hold_list.So only control the number of hold_list can get better
>> performance.
>
>So this is a pretty obvious tradeoff of increased latency for improved
>throughput. Any idea how much this change affects latency?
>Especially in the fast device case?
I did not think the latency.If it only fetch preread_bypass_threshold stripes from delay_list to
host_list,the latency can be control by userspace.
The code like :
static void raid5_activate_delayed(struct r5conf *conf)
{
+ int count = 0;
if (atomic_read(&conf->preread_active_stripes) < IO_THRESHOLD) {
while (!list_empty(&conf->delayed_list)) {
struct list_head *l = conf->delayed_list.next;
@@ -3672,6 +3673,8 @@ static void raid5_activate_delayed(struct r5conf *conf)
if (!test_and_set_bit(STRIPE_PREREAD_ACTIVE, &sh->state))
atomic_inc(&conf->preread_active_stripes);
list_add_tail(&sh->lru, &conf->hold_list);
+ if (++count >= conf->preread_active_stripes)
+ break;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-16 1:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-13 10:31 [PATCH V1] raidd5:Only move IO_THRESHOLD stripes from delay_list to hold_list once majianpeng
2012-07-13 23:56 ` Dan Williams
2012-07-16 1:09 ` majianpeng [this message]
2012-07-16 7:46 ` NeilBrown
2012-07-16 8:53 ` majianpeng
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=201207160909343901731@gmail.com \
--to=majianpeng@gmail.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=shli@kernel.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).