From: Jim Guo <jimmygc2008@gmail.com>
To: Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>
Cc: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IO hang when cache do not have enough buckets on small SSD
Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 13:58:46 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAG9eTxTMOqs0kUEGhWYhUj2VkpgwBmtZQ_AJEkT=02oksep3yQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6c9fded6-30f8-b3cd-527b-0ca95fdca6ba@suse.de>
> What is the kernel version in your system? And where the kernel package
> is from?
I am using kernel version 4.19.142, I compile it from source code
downloaded from kernel.org.
> Do you have a testing result on this idea?
Sorry, the testing environment is not owned by me and I did not keep
any testing result currently. I will test for this later in my own
testing environment.
Coly Li <colyli@suse.de> 于2021年5月17日周一 下午7:53写道:
>
> On 5/17/21 11:54 AM, Jim Guo wrote:
> > Hello, Mr. Li.
> > Recently I was experiencing frequent io hang when testing with fio
> > with 4K random write. Fio iops dropped to 0 for about 20 seconds
> > every several minutes.
> > After some debugging, I discovered that it is the incremental gc that
> > cause this problem.
> > My cache disk is relatively small (375GiB with 4K block size and 512K
> > bucket size), backing hdds are 4 x 1 TiB. I cannot reproduce this on
> > another environment with bigger cache disk.
> > When running 4K random write fio bench, the buckets are consumed very
> > quickly and soon it has to invalidate some bucket (this happens quite
> > often). Since the cache disk is small, a lot of write io will soon
> > reach sectors_to_gc and trigger gc thread. Write io will also increase
> > search_inflight, which cause gc thread to sleep for 100ms. This will
> > cause gc procedure to execute for a long time, and invalidating bucket
> > for the write io will wait for the whole gc procedure.
> > After removing the 100ms sleep from the incremental gc patch, the io
> > never hang any more.
>
> What is the kernel version in your system? And where the kernel package
> is from?
>
>
> > I think for small ssd, sleeping for 100ms seems too long or maybe
> > write io should not trigger gc thread to sleep for 100ms?
> > Thank you very much.
> >
>
> Do you have a testing result on this idea?
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> Coly Li
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-26 5:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-17 3:54 IO hang when cache do not have enough buckets on small SSD Jim Guo
2021-05-17 11:53 ` Coly Li
2021-05-26 5:58 ` Jim Guo [this message]
2021-05-26 6:09 ` Coly Li
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='CAG9eTxTMOqs0kUEGhWYhUj2VkpgwBmtZQ_AJEkT=02oksep3yQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jimmygc2008@gmail.com \
--cc=colyli@suse.de \
--cc=linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).