From: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
neilb@suse.de, djbw@fb.com
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] raid5: offload stripe handle to workqueue
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:24:34 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130731012434.GA1504@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130730135751.GD12016@htj.dyndns.org>
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 09:57:51AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 09:07:08PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > Ok, I should explain here. I can't add a work_struct for each stripe, because
> > this will stress workqueue very hard. My system handles > 1M/s stripes, which
> > makes workqueue pool lock contended very hard.
>
> It doesn't have to be embedding work_struct in each stripe and
> schduling them altogether. It's more about scheduling "work units"
> rather than "workers" - ie. letting each scheduled work item handle
> single work unit rather than making it dispatch multiple work items.
> It may make controlling concurrency a bit more interesting but you can
> always do it with workqueue_set_max_active(), which is the intended
> usage anyway.
stripe is the work unit actually. As I said, if I queue a work for each stripe,
just queue_work() will make the system blast because of the pwq->pool->lock
contention. dispatching one work has another side effect that I can't add block
plug. Since this is the queue stage concurrency problem,
workqueue_set_max_active() doesn't help.
Thanks,
Shaohua
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-31 1:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-30 5:52 [patch 0/3] raid5: make stripe handling multi-threading shli
2013-07-30 5:52 ` [patch 1/3] raid5: offload stripe handle to workqueue shli
2013-07-30 11:46 ` Tejun Heo
2013-07-30 12:53 ` Tejun Heo
2013-07-30 13:07 ` Shaohua Li
2013-07-30 13:57 ` Tejun Heo
2013-07-31 1:24 ` Shaohua Li [this message]
2013-07-31 10:33 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-01 2:01 ` Shaohua Li
2013-08-01 12:15 ` Tejun Heo
2013-07-30 5:52 ` [patch 2/3] raid5: sysfs entry to control worker thread number shli
2013-07-30 5:52 ` [patch 3/3] raid5: only wakeup necessary threads shli
2013-07-30 12:46 ` Tejun Heo
2013-07-30 13:24 ` Shaohua Li
2013-07-30 14:01 ` Tejun Heo
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=20130731012434.GA1504@kernel.org \
--to=shli@kernel.org \
--cc=djbw@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=tj@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