diff mbox

[RFC,0/3] block: Fix fsync slowness with CFQ cgroups

Message ID 4E09B457.9050800@parallels.com
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Konstantin Khlebnikov June 28, 2011, 11 a.m. UTC 
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> This patch series seems to be working for me. I did testing for ext4 only.
> This series is based on for-3.1/core branch of Jen's block tree.
> Konstantin, can you please give it a try and see if it fixes your
> issue.

It works for me too, for ext3 and ext4, on top 3.0-rc5, after these trivial fixes:

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

Vivek Goyal June 28, 2011, 1:45 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:00:39PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >This patch series seems to be working for me. I did testing for ext4 only.
> >This series is based on for-3.1/core branch of Jen's block tree.
> >Konstantin, can you please give it a try and see if it fixes your
> >issue.
> 
> It works for me too, for ext3 and ext4, on top 3.0-rc5, after these trivial fixes:
> 
> --- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
> +++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
> @@ -1511,7 +1519,7 @@ static void cfq_add_rq_rb(struct request *rq)
>          * if that happens, put the alias on the dispatch list
>          */
>         while ((__alias = elv_rb_add(&cfqq->sort_list, rq)) != NULL)
> -               cfq_dispatch_insert(cfqd->queue, __alias);
> +               cfq_dispatch_insert(cfqd->queue, __alias, false);
> 
>         if (!cfq_cfqq_on_rr(cfqq))
>                 cfq_add_cfqq_rr(cfqd, cfqq);
> @@ -3797,12 +3797,11 @@ cfq_set_depends_on_task(struct request_queue *q, struct task_struct *tsk)
>          */
>         rcu_read_lock();
>         if (task_blkio_cgroup(current) == task_blkio_cgroup(tsk))
> -               return;
> -       rcu_read_unlock();
> +               goto out_unlock_rcu;
> 
>         cic = cfq_cic_lookup(cfqd, current->io_context);
>         if (!cic)
> -               return;
> +               goto out_unlock_rcu;

You have done this change because you want to keep cfq_cic_lookup() also
in rcu read side critical section? I am assuming that it works even
without this. Though keeping it under rcu is probably more correct as
cic objects are freed in rcu manner.

Thanks
Vivek
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Konstantin Khlebnikov June 28, 2011, 2:42 p.m. UTC | #2 
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:00:39PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>> Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>> This patch series seems to be working for me. I did testing for ext4 only.
>>> This series is based on for-3.1/core branch of Jen's block tree.
>>> Konstantin, can you please give it a try and see if it fixes your
>>> issue.
>>
>> It works for me too, for ext3 and ext4, on top 3.0-rc5, after these trivial fixes:
>>
>> --- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
>> +++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
>> @@ -1511,7 +1519,7 @@ static void cfq_add_rq_rb(struct request *rq)
>>           * if that happens, put the alias on the dispatch list
>>           */
>>          while ((__alias = elv_rb_add(&cfqq->sort_list, rq)) != NULL)
>> -               cfq_dispatch_insert(cfqd->queue, __alias);
>> +               cfq_dispatch_insert(cfqd->queue, __alias, false);
>>
>>          if (!cfq_cfqq_on_rr(cfqq))
>>                  cfq_add_cfqq_rr(cfqd, cfqq);
>> @@ -3797,12 +3797,11 @@ cfq_set_depends_on_task(struct request_queue *q, struct task_struct *tsk)
>>           */
>>          rcu_read_lock();
>>          if (task_blkio_cgroup(current) == task_blkio_cgroup(tsk))
>> -               return;
>> -       rcu_read_unlock();
>> +               goto out_unlock_rcu;
>>
>>          cic = cfq_cic_lookup(cfqd, current->io_context);
>>          if (!cic)
>> -               return;
>> +               goto out_unlock_rcu;
>
> You have done this change because you want to keep cfq_cic_lookup() also
> in rcu read side critical section? I am assuming that it works even
> without this. Though keeping it under rcu is probably more correct as
> cic objects are freed in rcu manner.

No, your just forgot to relese rcu in case task_blkio_cgroup(current) == task_blkio_cgroup(tsk)

>
> Thanks
> Vivek

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Vivek Goyal June 28, 2011, 2:47 p.m. UTC | #3 
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 06:42:57PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:00:39PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> >>Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >>>This patch series seems to be working for me. I did testing for ext4 only.
> >>>This series is based on for-3.1/core branch of Jen's block tree.
> >>>Konstantin, can you please give it a try and see if it fixes your
> >>>issue.
> >>
> >>It works for me too, for ext3 and ext4, on top 3.0-rc5, after these trivial fixes:
> >>
> >>--- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
> >>+++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
> >>@@ -1511,7 +1519,7 @@ static void cfq_add_rq_rb(struct request *rq)
> >>          * if that happens, put the alias on the dispatch list
> >>          */
> >>         while ((__alias = elv_rb_add(&cfqq->sort_list, rq)) != NULL)
> >>-               cfq_dispatch_insert(cfqd->queue, __alias);
> >>+               cfq_dispatch_insert(cfqd->queue, __alias, false);
> >>
> >>         if (!cfq_cfqq_on_rr(cfqq))
> >>                 cfq_add_cfqq_rr(cfqd, cfqq);
> >>@@ -3797,12 +3797,11 @@ cfq_set_depends_on_task(struct request_queue *q, struct task_struct *tsk)
> >>          */
> >>         rcu_read_lock();
> >>         if (task_blkio_cgroup(current) == task_blkio_cgroup(tsk))
> >>-               return;
> >>-       rcu_read_unlock();
> >>+               goto out_unlock_rcu;
> >>
> >>         cic = cfq_cic_lookup(cfqd, current->io_context);
> >>         if (!cic)
> >>-               return;
> >>+               goto out_unlock_rcu;
> >
> >You have done this change because you want to keep cfq_cic_lookup() also
> >in rcu read side critical section? I am assuming that it works even
> >without this. Though keeping it under rcu is probably more correct as
> >cic objects are freed in rcu manner.
> 
> No, your just forgot to relese rcu in case task_blkio_cgroup(current) == task_blkio_cgroup(tsk)

Oh, that's right. Thanks for catching this. I will fix it.

Thanks
Vivek
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

--- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
@@ -1511,7 +1519,7 @@  static void cfq_add_rq_rb(struct request *rq)
          * if that happens, put the alias on the dispatch list
          */
         while ((__alias = elv_rb_add(&cfqq->sort_list, rq)) != NULL)
-               cfq_dispatch_insert(cfqd->queue, __alias);
+               cfq_dispatch_insert(cfqd->queue, __alias, false);

         if (!cfq_cfqq_on_rr(cfqq))
                 cfq_add_cfqq_rr(cfqd, cfqq);
@@ -3797,12 +3797,11 @@  cfq_set_depends_on_task(struct request_queue *q, struct task_struct *tsk)
          */
         rcu_read_lock();
         if (task_blkio_cgroup(current) == task_blkio_cgroup(tsk))
-               return;
-       rcu_read_unlock();
+               goto out_unlock_rcu;

         cic = cfq_cic_lookup(cfqd, current->io_context);
         if (!cic)
-               return;
+               goto out_unlock_rcu;

         task_lock(tsk);
         spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
@@ -3847,6 +3846,8 @@  cfq_set_depends_on_task(struct request_queue *q, struct task_struct *tsk)
  out_unlock:
         spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
         task_unlock(tsk);
+out_unlock_rcu:
+       rcu_read_unlock();
  }
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org