Re: [PATCH v2] bcache: fix set_at_max_writeback_rate() for multiple attached devices

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





在 2022/9/18 20:16, Coly Li 写道:
Inside set_at_max_writeback_rate() the calculation in following if()
check is wrong,
	if (atomic_inc_return(&c->idle_counter) <
	    atomic_read(&c->attached_dev_nr) * 6)

Because each attached backing device has its own writeback thread
running and increasing c->idle_counter, the counter increates much
faster than expected. The correct calculation should be,
	(counter / dev_nr) < dev_nr * 6
which equals to,
	counter < dev_nr * dev_nr * 6

This patch fixes the above mistake with correct calculation, and helper
routine idle_counter_exceeded() is added to make code be more clear.

Reported-by: Mingzhe Zou <mingzhe.zou@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Coly Li <colyli@xxxxxxx>
---
Changelog:
v2: Add the missing "!atomic_read(&c->at_max_writeback_rate)" part
     back.
v1: Original verison.

  drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c b/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c
index 647661005176..c186bf55fe61 100644
--- a/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c
+++ b/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c
@@ -157,6 +157,53 @@ static void __update_writeback_rate(struct cached_dev *dc)
  	dc->writeback_rate_target = target;
  }
+static bool idle_counter_exceeded(struct cache_set *c)
+{
+	int counter, dev_nr;
+
+	/*
+	 * If c->idle_counter is overflow (idel for really long time),
+	 * reset as 0 and not set maximum rate this time for code
+	 * simplicity.
+	 */
+	counter = atomic_inc_return(&c->idle_counter);
+	if (counter <= 0) {
+		atomic_set(&c->idle_counter, 0);
+		return false;
+	}
+
+	dev_nr = atomic_read(&c->attached_dev_nr);
+	if (dev_nr == 0)
+		return false;
+
+	/*
+	 * c->idle_counter is increased by writeback thread of all
+	 * attached backing devices, in order to represent a rough
+	 * time period, counter should be divided by dev_nr.
+	 * Otherwise the idle time cannot be larger with more backing
+	 * device attached.
+	 * The following calculation equals to checking
+	 *	(counter / dev_nr) < (dev_nr * 6)
+	 */
+	if (counter < (dev_nr * dev_nr * 6))
+		return false;
Hi, Coly

Look good to me. However, do we need to specify a maximum value for idle_counter. If cache_set has 100 backing devices, there are dev_nr*6 rounds of update_writeback_rate() on each backing device, which takes dc->writeback_rate_update_seconds(default is 5 seconds)*600 seconds.

In fact, any io request from the backing device will clear the idle_counter of cache_set, and at_max_writeback_rate will exit soon. Therefore, if cache_set waits for 5 minutes or 10 minutes without any io request to start at_max_writeback_rate, it will not have any effect on the possible front-end io.

In addition, cache_set only waits 6 rounds of update_writeback_rate() should not have much performance impact.

mingzhe
+
+	return true;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Idle_counter is increased everytime when update_writeback_rate() is
+ * called. If all backing devices attached to the same cache set have
+ * identical dc->writeback_rate_update_seconds values, it is about 6
+ * rounds of update_writeback_rate() on each backing device before
+ * c->at_max_writeback_rate is set to 1, and then max wrteback rate set
+ * to each dc->writeback_rate.rate.
+ * In order to avoid extra locking cost for counting exact dirty cached
+ * devices number, c->attached_dev_nr is used to calculate the idle
+ * throushold. It might be bigger if not all cached device are in write-
+ * back mode, but it still works well with limited extra rounds of
+ * update_writeback_rate().
+ */
  static bool set_at_max_writeback_rate(struct cache_set *c,
  				       struct cached_dev *dc)
  {
@@ -167,21 +214,8 @@ static bool set_at_max_writeback_rate(struct cache_set *c,
  	/* Don't set max writeback rate if gc is running */
  	if (!c->gc_mark_valid)
  		return false;
-	/*
-	 * Idle_counter is increased everytime when update_writeback_rate() is
-	 * called. If all backing devices attached to the same cache set have
-	 * identical dc->writeback_rate_update_seconds values, it is about 6
-	 * rounds of update_writeback_rate() on each backing device before
-	 * c->at_max_writeback_rate is set to 1, and then max wrteback rate set
-	 * to each dc->writeback_rate.rate.
-	 * In order to avoid extra locking cost for counting exact dirty cached
-	 * devices number, c->attached_dev_nr is used to calculate the idle
-	 * throushold. It might be bigger if not all cached device are in write-
-	 * back mode, but it still works well with limited extra rounds of
-	 * update_writeback_rate().
-	 */
-	if (atomic_inc_return(&c->idle_counter) <
-	    atomic_read(&c->attached_dev_nr) * 6)
+
+	if (!idle_counter_exceeded(c))
  		return false;
if (atomic_read(&c->at_max_writeback_rate) != 1)
@@ -195,13 +229,10 @@ static bool set_at_max_writeback_rate(struct cache_set *c,
  	dc->writeback_rate_change = 0;
/*
-	 * Check c->idle_counter and c->at_max_writeback_rate agagain in case
-	 * new I/O arrives during before set_at_max_writeback_rate() returns.
-	 * Then the writeback rate is set to 1, and its new value should be
-	 * decided via __update_writeback_rate().
+	 * In case new I/O arrives during before
+	 * set_at_max_writeback_rate() returns.
  	 */
-	if ((atomic_read(&c->idle_counter) <
-	     atomic_read(&c->attached_dev_nr) * 6) ||
+	if (!idle_counter_exceeded(c) ||
  	    !atomic_read(&c->at_max_writeback_rate))
  		return false;



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux