Re: [PATCH -next v4 4/4] blk-throttle: fix io hung due to config updates

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

 



On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 04:26:33PM +0800, Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Fix the problem by respecting the time that throttled bio aready waited.
> In order to do that, add new fields to record how many bytes/io already
> waited, and use it to calculate wait time for throttled bio under new
> configuration.

This new approach is correctly conserving the bandwidth upon changes.
(Looking and BPS paths.)

> 
> Some simple test:
> 1)
> cd /sys/fs/cgroup/blkio/
> echo $$ > cgroup.procs
> echo "8:0 2048" > blkio.throttle.write_bps_device
> {
>         sleep 3
>         echo "8:0 1024" > blkio.throttle.write_bps_device
> } &
> sleep 1
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=8k count=1 oflag=direct
> 
> 2)
> cd /sys/fs/cgroup/blkio/
> echo $$ > cgroup.procs
> echo "8:0 1024" > blkio.throttle.write_bps_device
> {
>         sleep 5
>         echo "8:0 2048" > blkio.throttle.write_bps_device
> } &
> sleep 1
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=8k count=1 oflag=direct
> 

It's interesting that you're getting these numbers (w/patch)

> test results: io finish time
> 	before this patch	with this patch
> 1)	10s			6s
> 2)	8s			6s

wait := (disp + bio - Δt*l_old) / l_new

1)
wait = (0k + 8k - 3s*2k/s) / 1k/s = 2s -> i.e. 5s absolute

2)
wait = (0k + 8k - 5s*1k/s) / 2k/s = 2.5s -> i.e. 6.5s absolute

Are you numbers noisy+rounded or do I still mis anything?

(Also isn't it worth having this more permanent in tools/testing/selftest?)

> +static void tg_update_skipped(struct throtl_grp *tg)
> +{
> +	if (tg->service_queue.nr_queued[READ])
> +		__tg_update_skipped(tg, READ);
> +	if (tg->service_queue.nr_queued[WRITE])
> +		__tg_update_skipped(tg, WRITE);

On one hand, the callers of tg_update_skipped() know whether R/W limit
is changed, so only the respective variant could be called.
On the other hand, this conditions look implied by tg->flags &
THROTL_TG_PENDING.
(Just noting, it's likely still not possibly to pass the skipped value
only via stack.)


> @@ -115,6 +115,10 @@ struct throtl_grp {
>  	uint64_t bytes_disp[2];
>  	/* Number of bio's dispatched in current slice */
>  	unsigned int io_disp[2];
> +	/* Number of bytes will be skipped in current slice */
> +	uint64_t bytes_skipped[2];
> +	/* Number of bio's will be skipped in current slice */
> +	unsigned int io_skipped[2];

Please add a comment these fields exists to facilitate config updates
(the bytes to be skipped is sort of obvious from the name :-).

Thanks,
Michal




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux