From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:57:57 -0700 From: Ross Zwisler Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/15] dax: increase granularity of dax_clear_blocks() operations Message-ID: <20151103175757.GA23366@linux.intel.com> References: <20151102042941.6610.27784.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <20151102042952.6610.7185.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <20151103005113.GN10656@dastard> <20151103044802.GP10656@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dan Williams Cc: Dave Chinner , Jens Axboe , Jan Kara , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jeff Moyer , Jan Kara , Ross Zwisler , Christoph Hellwig List-ID: On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 09:31:11PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 07:27:26PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > >> > On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 11:29:53PM -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > >> > The zeroing (and the data, for that matter) doesn't need to be > >> > committed to persistent store until the allocation is written and > >> > committed to the journal - that will happen with a REQ_FLUSH|REQ_FUA > >> > write, so it makes sense to deploy the big hammer and delay the > >> > blocking CPU cache flushes until the last possible moment in cases > >> > like this. > >> > >> In pmem terms that would be a non-temporal memset plus a delayed > >> wmb_pmem at REQ_FLUSH time. Better to write around the cache than > >> loop over the dirty-data issuing flushes after the fact. We'll bump > >> the priority of the non-temporal memset implementation. > > > > Why is it better to do two synchronous physical writes to memory > > within a couple of microseconds of CPU time rather than writing them > > through the cache and, in most cases, only doing one physical write > > to memory in a separate context that expects to wait for a flush > > to complete? > > With a switch to non-temporal writes they wouldn't be synchronous, > although it's doubtful that the subsequent writes after zeroing would > also hit the store buffer. > > If we had a method to flush by physical-cache-way rather than a > virtual address then it would indeed be better to save up for one > final flush, but when we need to resort to looping through all the > virtual addresses that might have touched it gets expensive. I agree with the idea that we should avoid the "big hammer" flushing in response to REQ_FLUSH. Here are the steps that are needed to make sure that something is durable on media with PMEM/DAX: 1) Write, either with non-temporal stores or with stores that use the processor cache 2) If you wrote using the processor cache, flush or write back the processor cache 3) wmb_pmem(), synchronizing all non-temporal writes and flushes durably to media. PMEM does all I/O using 1 and 3 with non-temporal stores, and mmaps that go to userspace can used cached writes, so on fsync/msync we do a bunch of flushes for step 2. In either case I think we should have the PMEM driver just do step 3, the wmb_pmem(), in response to REQ_FLUSH. This allows the zeroing code to just do non-temporal writes of zeros, the DAX fsync/msync code to just do flushes (which is what my patch set already does), and just leave the wmb_pmem() to the PMEM driver at REQ_FLUSH time. This makes the burden of REQ_FLUSH bearable for the PMEM driver, allowing us to avoid looping through potentially terabytes of PMEM on each REQ_FLUSH bio. This just means that the layers above the PMEM code either need to use non-temporal writes for their I/Os, or do flushing, which I don't think is too onerous. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755754AbbKCR6C (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2015 12:58:02 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:49269 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755734AbbKCR57 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2015 12:57:59 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,239,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="842225244" Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:57:57 -0700 From: Ross Zwisler To: Dan Williams Cc: Dave Chinner , Jens Axboe , Jan Kara , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jeff Moyer , Jan Kara , Ross Zwisler , Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/15] dax: increase granularity of dax_clear_blocks() operations Message-ID: <20151103175757.GA23366@linux.intel.com> References: <20151102042941.6610.27784.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <20151102042952.6610.7185.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <20151103005113.GN10656@dastard> <20151103044802.GP10656@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 09:31:11PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 07:27:26PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > >> > On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 11:29:53PM -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > >> > The zeroing (and the data, for that matter) doesn't need to be > >> > committed to persistent store until the allocation is written and > >> > committed to the journal - that will happen with a REQ_FLUSH|REQ_FUA > >> > write, so it makes sense to deploy the big hammer and delay the > >> > blocking CPU cache flushes until the last possible moment in cases > >> > like this. > >> > >> In pmem terms that would be a non-temporal memset plus a delayed > >> wmb_pmem at REQ_FLUSH time. Better to write around the cache than > >> loop over the dirty-data issuing flushes after the fact. We'll bump > >> the priority of the non-temporal memset implementation. > > > > Why is it better to do two synchronous physical writes to memory > > within a couple of microseconds of CPU time rather than writing them > > through the cache and, in most cases, only doing one physical write > > to memory in a separate context that expects to wait for a flush > > to complete? > > With a switch to non-temporal writes they wouldn't be synchronous, > although it's doubtful that the subsequent writes after zeroing would > also hit the store buffer. > > If we had a method to flush by physical-cache-way rather than a > virtual address then it would indeed be better to save up for one > final flush, but when we need to resort to looping through all the > virtual addresses that might have touched it gets expensive. I agree with the idea that we should avoid the "big hammer" flushing in response to REQ_FLUSH. Here are the steps that are needed to make sure that something is durable on media with PMEM/DAX: 1) Write, either with non-temporal stores or with stores that use the processor cache 2) If you wrote using the processor cache, flush or write back the processor cache 3) wmb_pmem(), synchronizing all non-temporal writes and flushes durably to media. PMEM does all I/O using 1 and 3 with non-temporal stores, and mmaps that go to userspace can used cached writes, so on fsync/msync we do a bunch of flushes for step 2. In either case I think we should have the PMEM driver just do step 3, the wmb_pmem(), in response to REQ_FLUSH. This allows the zeroing code to just do non-temporal writes of zeros, the DAX fsync/msync code to just do flushes (which is what my patch set already does), and just leave the wmb_pmem() to the PMEM driver at REQ_FLUSH time. This makes the burden of REQ_FLUSH bearable for the PMEM driver, allowing us to avoid looping through potentially terabytes of PMEM on each REQ_FLUSH bio. This just means that the layers above the PMEM code either need to use non-temporal writes for their I/Os, or do flushing, which I don't think is too onerous.