All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Ted Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>,
	Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>,
	Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@i2se.com>,
	Harshad Shirwadkar <harshadshirwadkar@gmail.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: [PATCH 0/5 v3] ext4: Fix performance regression with mballoc
Date: Thu,  8 Sep 2022 11:21:23 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220908091301.147-1-jack@suse.cz> (raw)

Hello,

Here is the third version of my mballoc improvements to avoid spreading
allocations with mb_optimize_scan=1. Since v2 there are only small changes and
fixes found during review and testing. Overall the series looks mostly ready to
go, I just didn't see any comments regarding patch 3 - a fix of metabg handling
in the Orlov allocator which is kind of independent, I've just found it when
reading the code. Also patch 5 needs final review after all the fixes.

Changes since v1:
- reworked data structure for CR 1 scan
- make small closed files use locality group preallocation
- fix metabg handling in the Orlov allocator

Changes since v2:
- whitespace fixes
- fix outdated comment
- fix handling of mb_structs_summary procfs file
- fix bad unlock on error recovery path

Original cover letter:

The patches fix the performance regression I was able to reproduce with reaim
on my test machine:

                     mb_optimize_scan=0     mb_optimize_scan=1     patched
Hmean     disk-1       2076.12 (   0.00%)     2099.37 (   1.12%)     2032.52 (  -2.10%)
Hmean     disk-41     92481.20 (   0.00%)    83787.47 *  -9.40%*    90308.37 (  -2.35%)
Hmean     disk-81    155073.39 (   0.00%)   135527.05 * -12.60%*   154285.71 (  -0.51%)
Hmean     disk-121   185109.64 (   0.00%)   166284.93 * -10.17%*   185298.62 (   0.10%)
Hmean     disk-161   229890.53 (   0.00%)   207563.39 *  -9.71%*   232883.32 *   1.30%*
Hmean     disk-201   223333.33 (   0.00%)   203235.59 *  -9.00%*   221446.93 (  -0.84%)
Hmean     disk-241   235735.25 (   0.00%)   217705.51 *  -7.65%*   239483.27 *   1.59%*
Hmean     disk-281   266772.15 (   0.00%)   241132.72 *  -9.61%*   263108.62 (  -1.37%)
Hmean     disk-321   265435.50 (   0.00%)   245412.84 *  -7.54%*   267277.27 (   0.69%)

The changes also significanly reduce spreading of allocations for small /
moderately sized files. I'm not able to measure a performance difference
resulting from this but on eMMC storage this seems to be the main culprit
of reduced performance. Untarring of raspberry-pi archive touches following
numbers of groups:

	mb_optimize_scan=0	mb_optimize_scan=1	patched
groups	4			22			7

To achieve this I have added two more changes on top of v1 - patches 4 and 5.
Patch 4 makes sure we use locality group preallocation even for files that are
not likely to grow anymore (previously we have disabled all preallocations for
such files, however locality group preallocation still makes a lot of sense for
such files). This patch reduced spread of a small file allocations but larger
file allocations were still spread significantly because they avoid locality
group preallocation and as they are not power-of-two in size, they also
immediately start with cr=1 scan. To address that I've changed the data
structure for looking up the best block group to allocate from (see patch 5
for details).

								Honza
Previous versions:
Link: http://lore.kernel.org/r/20220823134508.27854-1-jack@suse.cz # v1
Link: http://lore.kernel.org/r/20220906150803.375-1-jack@suse.cz # v2

             reply	other threads:[~2022-09-08  9:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-08  9:21 Jan Kara [this message]
2022-09-08  9:21 ` [PATCH 1/5] ext4: Make mballoc try target group first even with mb_optimize_scan Jan Kara
2022-09-22  2:52   ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-09-22  9:15     ` Jan Kara
2022-09-26  9:11       ` Jan Kara
2022-09-26 17:32         ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-09-08  9:21 ` [PATCH 2/5] ext4: Avoid unnecessary spreading of allocations among groups Jan Kara
2022-09-08  9:21 ` [PATCH 3/5] ext4: Make directory inode spreading reflect flexbg size Jan Kara
2022-09-08  9:21 ` [PATCH 4/5] ext4: Use locality group preallocation for small closed files Jan Kara
2022-09-08  9:21 ` [PATCH 5/5] ext4: Use buckets for cr 1 block scan instead of rbtree Jan Kara
2022-09-09  6:12   ` Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2022-09-08 10:36 ` [PATCH 0/5 v3] ext4: Fix performance regression with mballoc Stefan Wahren
2022-09-09 10:40   ` Jan Kara
2022-09-11 12:32     ` Stefan Wahren

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=20220908091301.147-1-jack@suse.cz \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=harshadshirwadkar@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=regressions@leemhuis.info \
    --cc=stefan.wahren@i2se.com \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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.