On 2017/7/2 上午3:39, Eric Wheeler wrote: > On Sun, 2 Jul 2017, Coly Li wrote: > >> On 2017/7/1 上午4:42, bcache@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> From: Eric Wheeler <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Bypass if: bio->bi_opf & (REQ_RAHEAD|REQ_BACKGROUND) >>> >>> Writeback if: op_is_sync(bio->bi_opf) || bio->bi_opf & (REQ_META|REQ_PRIO) >>> >> >> Hi Eric, >> >> Could you please explain a bit how the above policy is designed ? I'd >> like to understand it more. > > Hi Coly, > > It is pretty trivial, all of the processing code exists already. This > patch only adds to the existing functions for the constraints noted in the > patch. > > What happens is this: cached_dev_make_request() in request.c takes the IO > decides where the IO should go by using these two functions to decide > whether a bio should writeback or bypass: > check_should_bypass() > and > should_writeback() > > In check_should_bypass(), `if (bio->bi_opf & (REQ_RAHEAD|REQ_BACKGROUND))` > means bypass the cache because the bio has been flagged as a readahead or > background IO (no sense in polluting cache in either case). > > Later, if the bio is a write, then cached_dev_write() checks > should_writeback() > > In bio->bi_opf & (REQ_META|REQ_PRIO), it means writeback to cache. Some > filesystems use REQ_META for metadata operations which are best to keep > low-latency for high transactional performance. REQ_PRIO is a CFQ hint > that the priority of the IO has been raised, so writeback is faster here. > > Thanks for the detailed information. I come to understand :-) For writing case, I agree that metadata should be kept in cache device. For reading case, there is a special case for gfs2. gfs2 sets (REQ_RAHEAD | REQ_META) both for meta data read ahead code path, all other file systems use (REQ_META | REQ_PRIO) when doing metadata read ahead. I don't know whether this is something should be fixed in gfs2, but currently maybe we should also check REQ_META, + /* if the read ahead request is for metadata, don't skip it */ + if ((bio->bi_opf & (REQ_RAHEAD|REQ_BACKGROUND)) && + !(bio->bi_opf & REQ_META)) + goto skip; At least we can avoid a potential performance regression here. And could you please add the above information in patch comments. Thank you in advance. Coly >> >>> Signed-off-by: Eric Wheeler <bcache@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/md/bcache/request.c | 3 +++ >>> drivers/md/bcache/writeback.h | 3 ++- >>> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/request.c b/drivers/md/bcache/request.c >>> index a95609f..4629b0c 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/request.c >>> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/request.c >>> @@ -386,6 +386,9 @@ static bool check_should_bypass(struct cached_dev *dc, struct bio *bio) >>> op_is_write(bio_op(bio)))) >>> goto skip; >>> >>> + if (bio->bi_opf & (REQ_RAHEAD|REQ_BACKGROUND)) >>> + goto skip; >>> + >>> /* If the ioprio already exists on the bio, use that. We assume that >>> * the upper layer properly assigned the calling process's ioprio to >>> * the bio being passed to bcache. Otherwise, use current's ioc. */ >>> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.h b/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.h >>> index cd82fe8..ea2f92e 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.h >>> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.h >>> @@ -81,7 +81,8 @@ static inline bool should_writeback(struct cached_dev *dc, struct bio *bio, >>> return true; >>> } >>> >>> - return op_is_sync(bio->bi_opf) || in_use <= CUTOFF_WRITEBACK; >>> + return op_is_sync(bio->bi_opf) || bio->bi_opf & (REQ_META|REQ_PRIO) >>> + || in_use <= CUTOFF_WRITEBACK; >>> } >>> >>> static inline void bch_writeback_queue(struct cached_dev *dc) >>> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
