On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 05:27:33PM +0800, Kairui Song wrote:
> From: Kairui Song <kasong@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Instead of doing multiple tree walks, do one optimism range check
> with lock hold, and exit if raced with another insertion. If a shadow
> exists, check it with a new xas_get_order helper before releasing the
> lock to avoid redundant tree walks for getting its order.
>
> Drop the lock and do the allocation only if a split is needed.
>
> In the best case, it only need to walk the tree once. If it needs
> to alloc and split, 3 walks are issued (One for first ranced
> conflict check and order retrieving, one for the second check after
> allocation, one for the insert after split).
>
> Testing with 4k pages, in an 8G cgroup, with 20G brd as block device:
>
> fio -name=cached --numjobs=16 --filename=/mnt/test.img \
> --buffered=1 --ioengine=mmap --rw=randread --time_based \
> --ramp_time=30s --runtime=5m --group_reporting
>
> Before:
> bw ( MiB/s): min= 790, max= 3665, per=100.00%, avg=2499.17, stdev=20.64, samples=8698
> iops : min=202295, max=938417, avg=639785.81, stdev=5284.08, samples=8698
>
> After (+4%):
> bw ( MiB/s): min= 451, max= 3868, per=100.00%, avg=2599.83, stdev=23.39, samples=8653
> iops : min=115596, max=990364, avg=665556.34, stdev=5988.20, samples=8653
>
> Test result with THP (do a THP randread then switch to 4K page in hope it
> issues a lot of splitting):
>
> fio -name=cached --numjobs=16 --filename=/mnt/test.img \
> --buffered=1 --ioengine mmap -thp=1 --readonly \
> --rw=randread --random_distribution=random \
> --time_based --runtime=5m --group_reporting
>
> fio -name=cached --numjobs=16 --filename=/mnt/test.img \
> --buffered=1 --ioengine mmap --readonly \
> --rw=randread --random_distribution=random \
> --time_based --runtime=5s --group_reporting
>
> Before:
> bw ( KiB/s): min=28071, max=62359, per=100.00%, avg=53542.44, stdev=179.77, samples=9520
> iops : min= 7012, max=15586, avg=13379.39, stdev=44.94, samples=9520
> bw ( MiB/s): min= 2457, max= 6193, per=100.00%, avg=3923.21, stdev=82.48, samples=144
> iops : min=629220, max=1585642, avg=1004340.78, stdev=21116.07, samples=144
>
> After (+-0.0%):
> bw ( KiB/s): min=30561, max=63064, per=100.00%, avg=53635.82, stdev=177.21, samples=9520
> iops : min= 7636, max=15762, avg=13402.82, stdev=44.29, samples=9520
> bw ( MiB/s): min= 2449, max= 6145, per=100.00%, avg=3914.68, stdev=81.15, samples=144
> iops : min=627106, max=1573156, avg=1002158.11, stdev=20774.77, samples=144
>
> The performance is better (+4%) for 4K cached read and unchanged for THP.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kairui Song <kasong@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/filemap.c | 127 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index 6bbec8783793..c1484bcdbddb 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -848,12 +848,77 @@ void replace_page_cache_folio(struct folio *old, struct folio *new)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(replace_page_cache_folio);
>
> +static int __split_add_folio_locked(struct xa_state *xas, struct folio *folio,
> + pgoff_t index, gfp_t gfp, void **shadowp)
I don't love the name of this function. Splitting is a rare thing that
it does. I'd suggest it's more filemap_store().
> +{
> + void *entry, *shadow, *alloced_shadow = NULL;
> + int order, alloced_order = 0;
> +
> + gfp &= GFP_RECLAIM_MASK;
> + for (;;) {
> + shadow = NULL;
> + order = 0;
> +
> + xas_for_each_conflict(xas, entry) {
> + if (!xa_is_value(entry))
> + return -EEXIST;
> + shadow = entry;
> + }
> +
> + if (shadow) {
> + if (shadow == xas_reload(xas)) {
Why do you need the xas_reload here?
> + order = xas_get_order(xas);
> + if (order && order > folio_order(folio)) {
> + /* entry may have been split before we acquired lock */
> + if (shadow != alloced_shadow || order != alloced_order)
> + goto unlock;
> + xas_split(xas, shadow, order);
> + xas_reset(xas);
> + }
> + order = 0;
> + }
I don't think this is right. I think we can end up skipping a split
and storing a folio into a slot which is of greater order than the folio
we're storing.
> + if (shadowp)
> + *shadowp = shadow;
> + }
> +
> + xas_store(xas, folio);
> + /* Success, return with mapping locked */
> + if (!xas_error(xas))
> + return 0;
> +unlock:
> + /*
> + * Unlock path, if errored, return unlocked.
> + * If allocation needed, alloc and retry.
> + */
> + xas_unlock_irq(xas);
> + if (order) {
> + if (unlikely(alloced_order))
> + xas_destroy(xas);
> + xas_split_alloc(xas, shadow, order, gfp);
> + if (!xas_error(xas)) {
> + alloced_shadow = shadow;
> + alloced_order = order;
> + }
> + goto next;
> + }
> + /* xas_nomem result checked by xas_error below */
> + xas_nomem(xas, gfp);
> +next:
> + xas_lock_irq(xas);
> + if (xas_error(xas))
> + return xas_error(xas);
> +
> + xas_reset(xas);
> + }
> +}
Splitting this out into a different function while changing the logic
really makes this hard to review ;-(
I don't object to splitting the function, but maybe two patches; one
to move the logic and a second to change it?
