All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Cc: tj@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, ming.lei@redhat.com,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v5 4/8] blk-throttle: fix io hung due to config updates
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 19:26:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220622172621.GA28246@blackbody.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220528064330.3471000-5-yukuai3@huawei.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3434 bytes --]

(Apologies for taking so long before answering.)

On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 02:43:26PM +0800, Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> wrote:
> Some simple test:
> 1)
> cd /sys/fs/cgroup/blkio/
> echo $$ > cgroup.procs
> echo "8:0 2048" > blkio.throttle.write_bps_device
> {
>         sleep 2
>         echo "8:0 1024" > blkio.throttle.write_bps_device
> } &
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=8k count=1 oflag=direct
> 
> 2)
> cd /sys/fs/cgroup/blkio/
> echo $$ > cgroup.procs
> echo "8:0 1024" > blkio.throttle.write_bps_device
> {
>         sleep 4
>         echo "8:0 2048" > blkio.throttle.write_bps_device
> } &
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=8k count=1 oflag=direct
> 
> test results: io finish time
> 	before this patch	with this patch
> 1)	10s			6s
> 2)	8s			6s

I agree these are consistent and correct times.

And the new implementation won't make it worse (in terms of delaying a
bio) than configuring minimal limits from the beginning, AFACT.

> @@ -801,7 +836,8 @@ static bool tg_with_in_iops_limit(struct throtl_grp *tg, struct bio *bio,
>  
>  	/* Round up to the next throttle slice, wait time must be nonzero */
>  	jiffy_elapsed_rnd = roundup(jiffy_elapsed + 1, tg->td->throtl_slice);
> -	io_allowed = calculate_io_allowed(iops_limit, jiffy_elapsed_rnd);
> +	io_allowed = calculate_io_allowed(iops_limit, jiffy_elapsed_rnd) +
> +		     tg->io_skipped[rw];
>  	if (tg->io_disp[rw] + 1 <= io_allowed) {
>  		if (wait)
>  			*wait = 0;
> @@ -838,7 +874,8 @@ static bool tg_with_in_bps_limit(struct throtl_grp *tg, struct bio *bio,
>  		jiffy_elapsed_rnd = tg->td->throtl_slice;
>  
>  	jiffy_elapsed_rnd = roundup(jiffy_elapsed_rnd, tg->td->throtl_slice);
> -	bytes_allowed = calculate_bytes_allowed(bps_limit, jiffy_elapsed_rnd);
> +	bytes_allowed = calculate_bytes_allowed(bps_limit, jiffy_elapsed_rnd) +
> +			tg->bytes_skipped[rw];
>  	if (tg->bytes_disp[rw] + bio_size <= bytes_allowed) {
>  		if (wait)
>  			*wait = 0;
>

Here we may allow to dispatch a bio above current slice's
calculate_bytes_allowed() if bytes_skipped is already >0.

bytes_disp + bio_size <= calculate_bytes_allowed() + bytes_skipped

Then on the next update

> [shuffle]
> +static void __tg_update_skipped(struct throtl_grp *tg, bool rw)
> +{
> +	unsigned long jiffy_elapsed = jiffies - tg->slice_start[rw];
> +	u64 bps_limit = tg_bps_limit(tg, rw);
> +	u32 iops_limit = tg_iops_limit(tg, rw);
> +
> +	if (bps_limit != U64_MAX)
> +		tg->bytes_skipped[rw] +=
> +			calculate_bytes_allowed(bps_limit, jiffy_elapsed) -
> +			tg->bytes_disp[rw];
> +	if (iops_limit != UINT_MAX)
> +		tg->io_skipped[rw] +=
> +			calculate_io_allowed(iops_limit, jiffy_elapsed) -
> +			tg->io_disp[rw];
> +}

the difference(s) here could be negative. bytes_skipped should be
reduced to account for the additionally dispatched bio.
This is all unsigned so negative numbers underflow, however, we add them
again to the unsigned, so thanks to modular arithmetics the result is
correctly updated bytes_skipped.

Maybe add a comment about this (unsigned) intention?

(But can this happen? The discussed bio would have to outrun another bio
(the one which defined the current slice_end) but since blk-throttle
uses queues (FIFO) everywhere this shouldn't really happen. But it's
good to know this works as intended.)

This patch can have
Reviewed-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-22 17:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-28  6:43 [PATCH -next v5 0/8] bugfix and cleanup for blk-throttle Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43 ` Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43 ` [PATCH -next v5 1/8] blk-throttle: fix that io throttle can only work for single bio Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43   ` Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43 ` [PATCH -next v5 2/8] blk-throttle: prevent overflow while calculating wait time Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43   ` Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43 ` [PATCH -next v5 3/8] blk-throttle: factor out code to calculate ios/bytes_allowed Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43   ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-22 17:27   ` Michal Koutný
2022-06-23 12:03     ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-23 12:03       ` Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43 ` [PATCH -next v5 4/8] blk-throttle: fix io hung due to config updates Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43   ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-22 17:26   ` Michal Koutný [this message]
2022-06-23 12:27     ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-23 12:27       ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-23 16:26       ` Michal Koutný
2022-06-25  8:36         ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-25  8:36           ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-25 16:41           ` Jens Axboe
2022-06-25 16:41             ` Jens Axboe
2022-06-26  2:39             ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-26  2:39               ` Yu Kuai
2022-07-05 11:42             ` Yu Kuai
2022-07-05 11:42               ` Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43 ` [PATCH -next v5 5/8] blk-throttle: use 'READ/WRITE' instead of '0/1' Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43   ` Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43 ` [PATCH -next v5 6/8] blk-throttle: calling throtl_dequeue/enqueue_tg in pairs Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43   ` Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43 ` [PATCH -next v5 7/8] blk-throttle: cleanup tg_update_disptime() Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43   ` Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43 ` [PATCH -next v5 8/8] blk-throttle: clean up flag 'THROTL_TG_PENDING' Yu Kuai
2022-05-28  6:43   ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-02 11:14 ` [PATCH -next v5 0/8] bugfix and cleanup for blk-throttle Yu Kuai
2022-06-02 11:14   ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-09  0:59   ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-09  0:59     ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-17  1:15     ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-17  1:15       ` Yu Kuai

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20220622172621.GA28246@blackbody.suse.cz \
    --to=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.