On 07/28/2020 04:38 PM, Guoqing Jiang wrote:
On 7/28/20 9:18 AM, Xiao Ni wrote:
Now the discard request is split by chunk size. So it takes a long time
to finish mkfs on disks which support discard function. This patch
improve
handling raid10 discard request. It uses the similar way with patch
29efc390b (md/md0: optimize raid0 discard handling).
But it's a little complex than raid0. Because raid10 has different
layout.
If raid10 is offset layout and the discard request is smaller than
stripe
size. There are some holes when we submit discard bio to underlayer
disks.
For example: five disks (disk1 - disk5)
D01 D02 D03 D04 D05
D05 D01 D02 D03 D04
D06 D07 D08 D09 D10
D10 D06 D07 D08 D09
The discard bio just wants to discard from D03 to D10. For disk3,
there is
a hole between D03 and D08. For disk4, there is a hole between D04
and D09.
D03 is a chunk, raid10_write_request can handle one chunk perfectly. So
the part that is not aligned with stripe size is still handled by
raid10_write_request.
One question, is far layout handled by raid10_write_request or the
discard request?
If reshape is running when discard bio comes and the discard bio
spans the
reshape position, raid10_write_request is responsible to handle this
discard bio.
I did a test with this patch set.
Without patch:
time mkfs.xfs /dev/md0
real4m39.775s
user0m0.000s
sys0m0.298s
With patch:
time mkfs.xfs /dev/md0
real0m0.105s
user0m0.000s
sys0m0.007s
nvme3n1 259:1 0 477G 0 disk
└─nvme3n1p1 259:10 0 50G 0 part
nvme4n1 259:2 0 477G 0 disk
└─nvme4n1p1 259:11 0 50G 0 part
nvme5n1 259:6 0 477G 0 disk
└─nvme5n1p1 259:12 0 50G 0 part
nvme2n1 259:9 0 477G 0 disk
└─nvme2n1p1 259:15 0 50G 0 part
nvme0n1 259:13 0 477G 0 disk
└─nvme0n1p1 259:14 0 50G 0 part
v1:
Coly helps to review these patches and give some suggestions:
One bug is found. If discard bio is across one stripe but bio size is
bigger
than one stripe size. After spliting, the bio will be NULL. In this
version,
it checks whether discard bio size is bigger than 2*stripe_size.
In raid10_end_discard_request, it's better to check R10BIO_Uptodate
is set
or not. It can avoid write memory to improve performance.
Add more comments for calculating addresses.
v2:
Fix error by checkpatch.pl
Fix one bug for offset layout. v1 calculates wrongly split size
Add more comments to explain how the discard range of each component
disk
is decided.
The above change log are usually put under "---".
Thanks for reminding me about this.
Reviewed-by: Coly Li <colyli@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Xiao Ni <xni@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
[...]
+
+/* There are some limitations to handle discard bio
+ * 1st, the discard size is bigger than stripe_size*2.
+ * 2st, if the discard bio spans reshape progress, we use the old
way to
+ * handle discard bio
+ */
+static bool raid10_handle_discard(struct mddev *mddev, struct bio *bio)
+{
[...]
+ /* For far offset layout, if bio is not aligned with stripe
size, it splits
+ * the part that is not aligned with strip size.
+ */
+ if (geo.far_offset && (bio_start & stripe_mask)) {
+ sector_t split_size;
+ split_size = round_up(bio_start, stripe_size) - bio_start;
+ bio = raid10_split_bio(conf, bio, split_size, false);
+ }
+ if (geo.far_offset && (bio_end & stripe_mask)) {
+ sector_t split_size;
+ split_size = bio_sectors(bio) - (bio_end & stripe_mask);
+ bio = raid10_split_bio(conf, bio, split_size, true);
+ }
So far layout is handled here. I think the hole issue is existed for
far layout,
Just FYI.
It looks like I missed the far layout. Far layout is different with far
offset layout.
It doesn't need to consider the write hole problem. This patch only
consider the
write hole in one copy. For far layout, the discard region is
sequential. So we just
need to find the start/end address of next copy. I'll fix this in next
version.
Regards
Xiao
+
+ r10_bio = mempool_alloc(&conf->r10bio_pool, GFP_NOIO);
+ r10_bio->mddev = mddev;
+ r10_bio->state = 0;
+ memset(r10_bio->devs, 0, sizeof(r10_bio->devs[0]) *
conf->geo.raid_disks);
+
+ wait_blocked_dev(mddev, geo.raid_disks);
+
+ r10_bio->master_bio = bio;
+
+ bio_start = bio->bi_iter.bi_sector;
+ bio_end = bio_end_sector(bio);
+
+ /* raid10 uses chunk as the unit to store data. It's similar
like raid0.
+ * One stripe contains the chunks from all member disk (one
chunk from
+ * one disk at the same HAB address). For layout detail, see
'man md 4'
+ */
s/HAB/HBA/
Thanks,
Guoqing
