Linux RAID subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Su Yue <l@damenly.org>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk,  xni@redhat.com,  agk@redhat.com,
	 snitzer@kernel.org, mpatocka@redhat.com,  song@kernel.org,
	 viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	 nadav.amit@gmail.com,  ubizjak@gmail.com, cl@linux.com,
	 linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
	 yi.zhang@huawei.com,  yangerkun@huawei.com,
	johnny.chenyi@huawei.com,  "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] md: fix is_mddev_idle()
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2025 13:03:16 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <plh8agkr.fsf@damenly.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e5ec218e-dcab-ff8c-f455-d8fc6943a6e7@huaweicloud.com> (Yu Kuai's message of "Sat, 19 Apr 2025 10:00:16 +0800")

On Sat 19 Apr 2025 at 10:00, Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> 在 2025/04/19 9:42, Su Yue 写道:
>> On Fri 18 Apr 2025 at 09:09, Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
>>>
>>> If sync_speed is above speed_min, then is_mddev_idle() will be 
>>> called
>>> for each sync IO to check if the array is idle, and inflihgt 
>>> sync_io
>>> will be limited if the array is not idle.
>>>
>>> However, while mkfs.ext4 for a large raid5 array while 
>>> recovery is in
>>> progress, it's found that sync_speed is already above 
>>> speed_min while
>>> lots of stripes are used for sync IO, causing long delay for 
>>> mkfs.ext4.
>>>
>>> Root cause is the following checking from is_mddev_idle():
>>>
>>> t1: submit sync IO: events1 = completed IO - issued sync IO
>>> t2: submit next sync IO: events2  = completed IO - issued sync 
>>> IO
>>> if (events2 - events1 > 64)
>>>
>>> For consequence, the more sync IO issued, the less likely 
>>> checking will
>>> pass. And when completed normal IO is more than issued sync 
>>> IO, the
>>> condition will finally pass and is_mddev_idle() will return 
>>> false,
>>> however, last_events will be updated hence is_mddev_idle() can 
>>> only
>>> return false once in a while.
>>>
>>> Fix this problem by changing the checking as following:
>>>
>>> 1) mddev doesn't have normal IO completed;
>>> 2) mddev doesn't have normal IO inflight;
>>> 3) if any member disks is partition, and all other partitions 
>>> doesn't
>>>    have IO completed.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/md/md.c | 84 
>>>  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>>>  drivers/md/md.h |  3 +-
>>>  2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
>>> index 52cadfce7e8d..dfd85a5d6112 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/md/md.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/md/md.c
>>> @@ -8625,50 +8625,58 @@ void md_cluster_stop(struct mddev 
>>> *mddev)
>>>      put_cluster_ops(mddev);
>>>  }
>>>
>>> -static int is_mddev_idle(struct mddev *mddev, int init)
>>> +static bool is_rdev_holder_idle(struct md_rdev *rdev, bool 
>>> init)
>>>  {
>>> +    unsigned long last_events = rdev->last_events;
>>> +
>>> +    if (!bdev_is_partition(rdev->bdev))
>>> +        return true;
>>> +
>>> +    /*
>>> +     * If rdev is partition, and user doesn't issue IO to the 
>>> array, the
>>> +     * array is still not idle if user issues IO to other 
>>> partitions.
>>> +     */
>>> +    rdev->last_events = 
>>> part_stat_read_accum(rdev->bdev->bd_disk->part0,
>>> +                         sectors) -
>>> +                part_stat_read_accum(rdev->bdev, sectors);
>>> +
>>> +    if (!init && rdev->last_events > last_events)
>>> +        return false;
>>> +
>>> +    return true;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +/*
>>> + * mddev is idle if following conditions are match since last 
>>> check:
>>> + * 1) mddev doesn't have normal IO completed;
>>> + * 2) mddev doesn't have inflight normal IO;
>>> + * 3) if any member disk is partition, and other partitions 
>>> doesn't have IO
>>> + *    completed;
>>> + *
>>> + * Noted this checking rely on IO accounting is enabled.
>>> + */
>>> +static bool is_mddev_idle(struct mddev *mddev, int init)
>>> +{
>>> +    unsigned long last_events = mddev->last_events;
>>> +    struct gendisk *disk;
>>>      struct md_rdev *rdev;
>>> -    int idle;
>>> -    int curr_events;
>>> +    bool idle = true;
>>>
>>> -    idle = 1;
>>> -    rcu_read_lock();
>>> -    rdev_for_each_rcu(rdev, mddev) {
>>> -        struct gendisk *disk = rdev->bdev->bd_disk;
>>> +    disk = mddev_is_dm(mddev) ? mddev->dm_gendisk : 
>>> mddev->gendisk;
>>> +    if (!disk)
>>> +        return true;
>>>
>>> -        if (!init && !blk_queue_io_stat(disk->queue))
>>> -            continue;
>>> +    mddev->last_events = part_stat_read_accum(disk->part0, 
>>> sectors);
>>> +    if (!init && (mddev->last_events > last_events ||
>>> +              bdev_count_inflight(disk->part0)))
>>> +        idle = false;
>>>
>> Forgot return or goto here?
>
> No, following still need to be executed to init or update
> rdev->last_events.k
>

Okay, I see. is_rdev_holder_idle does the work.

--
Su

> Thanks,
> Kuai
>
>> -- Su
>>
>>> -        curr_events = (int)part_stat_read_accum(disk->part0, 
>>> sectors) -
>>> -                  atomic_read(&disk->sync_io);
>>> -        /* sync IO will cause sync_io to increase before the 
>>> disk_stats
>>> -         * as sync_io is counted when a request starts, and
>>> -         * disk_stats is counted when it completes.
>>> -         * So resync activity will cause curr_events to be 
>>> smaller than
>>> -         * when there was no such activity.
>>> -         * non-sync IO will cause disk_stat to increase 
>>> without
>>> -         * increasing sync_io so curr_events will 
>>> (eventually)
>>> -         * be larger than it was before.  Once it becomes
>>> -         * substantially larger, the test below will cause
>>> -         * the array to appear non-idle, and resync will slow
>>> -         * down.
>>> -         * If there is a lot of outstanding resync activity 
>>> when
>>> -         * we set last_event to curr_events, then all that 
>>> activity
>>> -         * completing might cause the array to appear 
>>> non-idle
>>> -         * and resync will be slowed down even though there 
>>> might
>>> -         * not have been non-resync activity.  This will only
>>> -         * happen once though.  'last_events' will soon 
>>> reflect
>>> -         * the state where there is little or no outstanding
>>> -         * resync requests, and further resync activity will
>>> -         * always make curr_events less than last_events.
>>> -         *
>>> -         */
>>> -        if (init || curr_events - rdev->last_events > 64) {
>>> -            rdev->last_events = curr_events;
>>> -            idle = 0;
>>> -        }
>>> -    }
>>> +    rcu_read_lock();
>>> +    rdev_for_each_rcu(rdev, mddev)
>>> +        if (!is_rdev_holder_idle(rdev, init))
>>> +            idle = false;
>>>      rcu_read_unlock();
>>> +
>>>      return idle;
>>>  }
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.h b/drivers/md/md.h
>>> index b57842188f18..1d51c2405d3d 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/md/md.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/md/md.h
>>> @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ struct md_rdev {
>>>
>>>      sector_t sectors;        /* Device size (in 512bytes 
>>> sectors)  */
>>>      struct mddev *mddev;        /* RAID array if running */
>>> -    int last_events;        /* IO event timestamp */
>>> +    unsigned long last_events;    /* IO event timestamp */
>>>
>>>      /*
>>>       * If meta_bdev is non-NULL, it means that a separate 
>>> device  is
>>> @@ -520,6 +520,7 @@ struct mddev {
>>>                               * adding a spare
>>>                               */
>>>
>>> +    unsigned long            last_events;    /* IO event 
>>> timestamp */
>>>      atomic_t            recovery_active; /* blocks scheduled, 
>>> but  not
>>> written */
>>>      wait_queue_head_t        recovery_wait;
>>>      sector_t            recovery_cp;
>> .
>>

  reply	other threads:[~2025-04-19  5:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-18  1:09 [PATCH v2 0/5] md: fix is_mddev_idle() Yu Kuai
2025-04-18  1:09 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] block: cleanup and export bdev IO inflight APIs Yu Kuai
2025-04-21 11:59   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-04-21 13:13     ` Yu Kuai
2025-04-22  6:11       ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-04-18  1:09 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] md: record dm-raid gendisk in mddev Yu Kuai
2025-04-22  6:00   ` Xiao Ni
2025-04-18  1:09 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] md: add a new api sync_io_depth Yu Kuai
2025-04-22  6:15   ` Xiao Ni
2025-04-18  1:09 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] md: fix is_mddev_idle() Yu Kuai
2025-04-19  1:42   ` Su Yue
2025-04-19  2:00     ` Yu Kuai
2025-04-19  5:03       ` Su Yue [this message]
2025-04-22  6:35   ` Xiao Ni
2025-04-27  1:37     ` Yu Kuai
2025-04-27  2:45       ` Xiao Ni
2025-04-18  1:09 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] md: cleanup accounting for issued sync IO Yu Kuai
2025-04-22  6:36   ` Xiao Ni

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=plh8agkr.fsf@damenly.org \
    --to=l@damenly.org \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=johnny.chenyi@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
    --cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
    --cc=snitzer@kernel.org \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=xni@redhat.com \
    --cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=yukuai3@huawei.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