On 2012-08-13 10:20 Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx> Wrote:
>2012/8/13 Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:06:45AM +0800, Jianpeng Ma wrote:
>>> On 2012-08-13 08:21 Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx> Wrote:
>>> >2012/8/11 Jianpeng Ma <majianpeng@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>> >> On 2012-08-09 16:58 Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx> Wrote:
>>> >>>This is a new tempt to make raid5 handle stripes in multiple threads, as
>>> >>>suggested by Neil to have maxium flexibility and better numa binding. It
>>> >>>basically is a combination of my first and second generation patches. By
>>> >>>default, no multiple thread is enabled (all stripes are handled by raid5d).
>>> >>>
>>> >>>An example to enable multiple threads:
>>> >>>#echo 3 > /sys/block/md0/md/auxthread_number
>>> >>>This will create 3 auxiliary threads to handle stripes. The threads can run
>>> >>>on any cpus and handle stripes produced by any cpus.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>#echo 1-3 > /sys/block/md0/md/auxth0/cpulist
>>> >>>This will bind auxiliary thread 0 to cpu 1-3, and this thread will only handle
>>> >>>stripes produced by cpu 1-3. User tool can further change the thread's
>>> >>>affinity, but the thread can only handle stripes produced by cpu 1-3 till the
>>> >>>sysfs entry is changed again.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>If stripes produced by a CPU aren't handled by any auxiliary thread, such
>>> >>>stripes will be handled by raid5d. Otherwise, raid5d doesn't handle any
>>> >>>stripes.
>>> >>>
>>> >> I tested and found two problem(maybe not).
>>> >>
>>> >> 1:print cpulist of auxth, you maybe lost print the '\n'.
>>> >> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
>>> >> index 7c8151a..3700cdc 100644
>>> >> --- a/drivers/md/raid5.c
>>> >> +++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c
>>> >> @@ -4911,9 +4911,13 @@ struct raid5_auxth_sysfs {
>>> >> static ssize_t raid5_show_thread_cpulist(struct mddev *mddev,
>>> >> struct raid5_auxth *thread, char *page)
>>> >> {
>>> >> + int n;
>>> >> if (!mddev->private)
>>> >> return 0;
>>> >> - return cpulist_scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, &thread->work_mask);
>>> >> + n = cpulist_scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE - 2, &thread->work_mask);
>>> >> + page[n++] = '\n';
>>> >> + page[n] = 0;
>>> >> + return n;
>>> >> }
>>> >>
>>> >> static ssize_t
>>> >
>>> >some sysfs entries print out '\n', some not, I don't mind add it
>>> I search kernel code found places which like this print out '\n';
>>> Can you tell rule which use or not?
>>> Thanks!
>>
>> I'm not aware any rule about this
>>
>>> >> 2: Test 'dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/md0 bs=2M ', the performance regress remarkable.
>>> >> auxthread_number=0, 200MB/s;
>>> >> auxthread_number=4, 95MB/s.
>>> >
>>> >So multiple threads handle stripes reduce request merge. In your
>>> >workload, raid5d isn't a bottleneck at all. In practice, I thought only
>>> >array which can drive high IOPS needs enable multi thread. And
>>> >if you create multiple threads, better let the threads handle different
>>> >cpus.
>>> I will test for multiple threads.
>> Thanks
I used fio for randwrite test using four thread which run different cpus.
The bs is 4k/8k/16k.
The result isn't increase regardless of whether using authread(four authread which run different cpu) or not?
Maybe my test config had problem?
>
>BTW, can you try below patch for the above dd workload?
>http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-block.git;a=commitdiff;h=274193224cdabd687d804a26e0150bb20f2dd52c
>That one is reverted in upstream, but eventually we should make it
>enter again after some CFQ issues are fixed.
I tested this patch.And not found problem.And the performance did not increase.
?韬{.n?????%??檩??w?{.n???{炳盯w???塄}?财??j:+v?? ? ???2??璀??摺?囤??z夸z罐?+?????w棹f
