From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>,
ReiserFS Development List <reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>,
Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@texware.it>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release write lock on fs_changed()
Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 09:44:16 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1241185456.13084.28.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090501132825.GE6011@nowhere>
On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 15:28 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 08:31:12AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h b/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h
> > > index 6587b4e..397d281 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h
> > > @@ -1302,7 +1302,13 @@ static inline loff_t max_reiserfs_offset(struct inode *inode)
> > > #define get_generation(s) atomic_read (&fs_generation(s))
> > > #define FILESYSTEM_CHANGED_TB(tb) (get_generation((tb)->tb_sb) != (tb)->fs_gen)
> > > #define __fs_changed(gen,s) (gen != get_generation (s))
> > > -#define fs_changed(gen,s) ({cond_resched(); __fs_changed(gen, s);})
> > > +#define fs_changed(gen,s) \
> > > +({ \
> > > + reiserfs_write_unlock(s); \
> > > + cond_resched(); \
> > > + reiserfs_write_lock(s); \
> >
> > Did you try writing that
> >
> > if (need_resched()) { \
> > reiserfs_write_unlock(s); \
> > cond_resched(); \ (or schedule(), but cond_resched does a loop)
> > reiserfs_write_lock(s); \
> > }
> >
> > ? That might give better performance under load because users will be better
> > batched and you don't release the lock unnecessarily in the unloaded case.
>
>
>
> Good catch!
> And I guess this pattern matches most of the cond_resched()
> all over the code (the only condition is that we must already hold
> the write lock).
>
> I will merge your idea and Ingo's one, write a
> reiserfs_cond_resched() to have a helper which
> factorizes this pattern.
The pattern you'll find goes like this:
lock_kernel()
do some work
do something that might schedule
run fs_changed(), fixup as required.
In your setup it is translating to:
reiserfs_write_lock(s)
do some work
reiserfs_write_unlock(s)
do something that might schedule
reiserfs_write_lock(s)
if (need_resched()) {
reiserfs_write_unlock(s)
cond_resched()
reiserfs_write_lock(s)
}
if (__fs_changed()) fixup as required
You'll also find that item_moved is similar to __fs_changed() but more
fine grained.
One easy optimization is to make an fs_changed_relock()
static inline int fs_changed_relock(gen, s) {
cond_resched();
reiserfs_write_lock(s)
return __fs_changed(gen, s)
}
Another cause of scheduling is going to be reiserfs_prepare_for_journal.
This function gets called before we modify a metadata buffer and it
waits for IO to finish.
Not sure if your patch series already found it, but if you change this:
int reiserfs_prepare_for_journal(struct super_block *sb,
struct buffer_head *bh, int wait)
{
PROC_INFO_INC(sb, journal.prepare);
if (!trylock_buffer(bh)) {
if (!wait)
return 0;
lock_buffer(bh);
}
Into:
if (!trylock_buffer(bh)) {
if (!wait)
return 0;
reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
wait_on_buffer(bh);
reiserfs_write_lock(s);
lock_buffer(bh);
}
You'll catch a big cause of waiting for the disk with the lock held.
-chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-01 13:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-01 2:44 [PATCH 0/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs3: performance improvements, faster than Bkl based scheme Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 1/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release write lock on fs_changed() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 6:31 ` Andi Kleen
2009-05-01 13:28 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 13:44 ` Chris Mason [this message]
2009-05-01 14:01 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 14:14 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-02 1:19 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 2/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock before rescheduling on do_journal_end() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 7:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:31 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 22:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 3/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release write lock while rescheduling on prepare_for_delete_or_cut() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 4/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock inside get_neighbors() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 5:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:25 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 13:29 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-01 13:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 5/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock inside reiserfs_read_bitmap_block() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 5:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:19 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 13:30 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-01 13:51 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 6/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock on flush_commit_list() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 5:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:13 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:26 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-01 13:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:54 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-01 5:35 ` [PATCH 0/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs3: performance improvements, faster than Bkl based scheme Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 12:18 ` Thomas Meyer
2009-05-01 14:12 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 19:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-01 20:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 20:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 21:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-01 21:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-02 1:39 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=1241185456.13084.28.camel@think.oraclecorp.com \
--to=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=a.beregalov@gmail.com \
--cc=abogani@texware.it \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jeffm@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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