From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, Ben Gamari <bgamari@gmail.com>,
ltt-dev@lists.casi.polymtl.ca
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: [Regression] High latency when doing large I/O
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:44:39 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090117004439.GA11492@Krystal> (raw)
Hi,
A long standing I/O regression (since 2.6.18, still there today) has hit
Slashdot recently :
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12309
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/01/15/049201
I've taken a trace reproducing the wrong behavior on my machine and I
think it's getting us somewhere.
LTTng 0.83, kernel 2.6.28
Machine : Intel Xeon E5405 dual quad-core, 16GB ram
(just created a new block-trace.c LTTng probe which is not released yet.
It basically replaces blktrace)
echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
lttctl -C -w /tmp/trace -o channel.mm.bufnum=8 -o channel.block.bufnum=64 trace
dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/newfile bs=1M count=1M
cp -ax music /tmp (copying 1.1GB of mp3)
ls (takes 15 seconds to get the directory listing !)
lttctl -D trace
I looked at the trace (especially at the ls surroundings), and bash is
waiting for a few seconds for I/O in the exec system call (to exec ls).
While this happens, we have dd doing lots and lots of bio_queue. There
is a bio_backmerge after each bio_queue event. This is reasonable,
because dd is writing to a contiguous file.
However, I wonder if this is not the actual problem. We have dd which
has the head request in the elevator request queue. It is progressing
steadily by plugging/unplugging the device periodically and gets its
work done. However, because requests are being dequeued at the same
rate others are being merged, I suspect it stays at the top of the queue
and does not let the other unrelated requests run.
There is a test in the blk-merge.c which makes sure that merged requests
do not get bigger than a certain size. However, if the request is
steadily dequeued, I think this test is not doing anything.
If you are interested in looking at the trace I've taken, I could
provide it.
Does that make sense ?
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
next reply other threads:[~2009-01-17 0:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-17 0:44 Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2009-01-17 16:26 ` [RFC PATCH] block: Fix bio merge induced high I/O latency Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-17 16:50 ` Leon Woestenberg
2009-01-17 17:15 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-17 19:04 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-18 21:12 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-18 21:27 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-19 18:26 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-20 2:10 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-20 7:37 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-20 12:28 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-20 14:22 ` [ltt-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-20 14:24 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-20 15:42 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-20 23:06 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-20 23:27 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-21 0:25 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-21 4:38 ` Ben Gamari
2009-01-21 4:54 ` [ltt-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-21 6:17 ` Ben Gamari
2009-01-22 22:59 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-23 3:21 ` [ltt-dev] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-01-23 4:03 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-02-10 3:36 ` [PATCH] mm fix page writeback accounting to fix oom condition under heavy I/O Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-02-10 3:55 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-10 5:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-02-10 5:56 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-10 6:12 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-02-02 2:08 ` [RFC PATCH] block: Fix bio merge induced high I/O latency Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-02-02 11:26 ` Jens Axboe
2009-02-03 0:46 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-20 13:45 ` [ltt-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-20 20:22 ` Ben Gamari
2009-01-20 22:23 ` Ben Gamari
2009-01-20 23:05 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-01-22 2:35 ` Ben Gamari
2009-01-19 15:45 ` Nikanth K
2009-01-19 18:23 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-17 20:03 ` Ben Gamari
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=20090117004439.GA11492@Krystal \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bgamari@gmail.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltt-dev@lists.casi.polymtl.ca \
/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