On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:38:26AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Fri 07-10-22 02:16:18, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote: > > Currently, the kernel uses i_prealloc_list to hold all the inode > > preallocations. This is known to cause degradation in performance in > > workloads which perform large number of sparse writes on a single file. > > This is mainly because functions like ext4_mb_normalize_request() and > > ext4_mb_use_preallocated() iterate over this complete list, resulting in > > slowdowns when large number of PAs are present. > > > > Patch 27bc446e2 partially fixed this by enforcing a limit of 512 for > > the inode preallocation list and adding logic to continually trim the > > list if it grows above the threshold, however our testing revealed that > > a hardcoded value is not suitable for all kinds of workloads. > > > > To optimize this, add an rbtree to the inode and hold the inode > > preallocations in this rbtree. This will make iterating over inode PAs > > faster and scale much better than a linked list. Additionally, we also > > had to remove the LRU logic that was added during trimming of the list > > (in ext4_mb_release_context()) as it will add extra overhead in rbtree. > > The discards now happen in the lowest-logical-offset-first order. > > > > ** Locking notes ** > > > > With the introduction of rbtree to maintain inode PAs, we can't use RCU > > to walk the tree for searching since it can result in partial traversals > > which might miss some nodes(or entire subtrees) while discards happen > > in parallel (which happens under a lock). Hence this patch converts the > > ei->i_prealloc_lock spin_lock to rw_lock. > > > > Almost all the codepaths that read/modify the PA rbtrees are protected > > by the higher level inode->i_data_sem (except > > ext4_mb_discard_group_preallocations() and ext4_clear_inode()) IIUC, the > > only place we need lock protection is when one thread is reading > > "searching" the PA rbtree (earlier protected under rcu_read_lock()) and > > another is "deleting" the PAs in ext4_mb_discard_group_preallocations() > > function (which iterates all the PAs using the grp->bb_prealloc_list and > > deletes PAs from the tree without taking any inode lock (i_data_sem)). > > > > So, this patch converts all rcu_read_lock/unlock() paths for inode list > > PA to use read_lock() and all places where we were using > > ei->i_prealloc_lock spinlock will now be using write_lock(). > > > > Note that this makes the fast path (searching of the right PA e.g. > > ext4_mb_use_preallocated() or ext4_mb_normalize_request()), now use > > read_lock() instead of rcu_read_lock/unlock(). Ths also will now block > > due to slow discard path (ext4_mb_discard_group_preallocations()) which > > uses write_lock(). > > > > But this is not as bad as it looks. This is because - > > > > 1. The slow path only occurs when the normal allocation failed and we > > can say that we are low on disk space. One can argue this scenario > > won't be much frequent. > > > > 2. ext4_mb_discard_group_preallocations(), locks and unlocks the rwlock > > for deleting every individual PA. This gives enough opportunity for > > the fast path to acquire the read_lock for searching the PA inode > > list. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx> > > Looks mostly good to me now. Just three nits below. With those fixes feel > free to add: > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> > > > @@ -4031,19 +4054,27 @@ ext4_mb_pa_adjust_overlap(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac, > > new_end = *end; > > > > /* check we don't cross already preallocated blocks */ > > - rcu_read_lock(); > > - list_for_each_entry_rcu(tmp_pa, &ei->i_prealloc_list, pa_node.inode_list) { > > - if (tmp_pa->pa_deleted) > > + read_lock(&ei->i_prealloc_lock); > > + for (iter = ei->i_prealloc_node.rb_node; iter; > > + iter = ext4_mb_pa_rb_next_iter(new_start, tmp_pa_start, iter)) { > > + tmp_pa = rb_entry(iter, struct ext4_prealloc_space, > > + pa_node.inode_node); > > + tmp_pa_start = tmp_pa->pa_lstart; > > + tmp_pa_end = tmp_pa->pa_lstart + EXT4_C2B(sbi, tmp_pa->pa_len); > > + > > + /* > > + * If pa is deleted, ignore overlaps and just iterate in rbtree > > + * based on tmp_pa_start > > + */ > > + if (tmp_pa->pa_deleted) { > > continue; > > + } > > Curly braces here are pointless. > > > @@ -4408,17 +4439,21 @@ ext4_mb_use_preallocated(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac) > > return false; > > > > /* first, try per-file preallocation */ > > - rcu_read_lock(); > > - list_for_each_entry_rcu(tmp_pa, &ei->i_prealloc_list, pa_node.inode_list) { > > + read_lock(&ei->i_prealloc_lock); > > + for (iter = ei->i_prealloc_node.rb_node; iter; > > + iter = ext4_mb_pa_rb_next_iter(ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical, tmp_pa_start, iter)) { > > + tmp_pa = rb_entry(iter, struct ext4_prealloc_space, pa_node.inode_node); > > > > /* all fields in this condition don't change, > > * so we can skip locking for them */ > > tmp_pa_start = tmp_pa->pa_lstart; > > tmp_pa_end = tmp_pa->pa_lstart + EXT4_C2B(sbi, tmp_pa->pa_len); > > > > + /* original request start doesn't lie in this PA */ > > if (ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical < tmp_pa_start || > > - ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical >= tmp_pa_end) > > + ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical >= tmp_pa_end) { > > continue; > > + } > > Again, curly braces here are pointless. > > > +static void ext4_mb_rb_insert(struct rb_root *root, struct rb_node *new, > > + int (*cmp)(struct rb_node *, struct rb_node *)) > > +{ > > + struct rb_node **iter = &root->rb_node, *parent = NULL; > > + > > + while (*iter) { > > + parent = *iter; > > + if (cmp(new, *iter) < 0) > > + iter = &((*iter)->rb_left); > > + else > > + iter = &((*iter)->rb_right); > > + } > > + > > + rb_link_node(new, parent, iter); > > + rb_insert_color(new, root); > > +} > > I think I wrote it already last time: ext4_mb_rb_insert() is always called > with ext4_mb_pa_cmp() as the comparison function. Furthemore > ext4_mb_pa_cmp() is used nowhere else. So I'd just opencode > ext4_mb_pa_cmp() in ext4_mb_rb_insert() and get rid of the indirect call. > Better for speed as well as readability. Hi Jan, As mentioned in change notes, I intentionally left it as it is to make ext4_mb_rb_insert() helper function reusable. However, I agree with your point about readability so I'll just merge the 2 functions and send a next version. Thanks, Ojaswin > > Honza > -- > Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> > SUSE Labs, CR