From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Xiaoguang Wang <xiaoguang.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com, Liu Bo <bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: Discussion: is it time to remove dioread_nolock?
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 12:42:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200108174259.GD263696@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200108104520.3BC4A4203F@d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2268 bytes --]
On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 04:15:13PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> Hello Ted/Jan,
>
> On 1/7/20 10:52 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 07-01-20 12:11:09, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > > Hmm..... There's actually an even more radical option we could use,
> > > given that Ritesh has made dioread_nolock work on block sizes < page
> > > size. We could make dioread_nolock the default, until we can revamp
> > > ext4_writepages() to write the data blocks first....
>
> Agreed. I guess it should be a straight forward change to make.
> It should be just removing test_opt(inode->i_sb, DIOREAD_NOLOCK) condition
> from ext4_should_dioread_nolock().
Actually, it's simpler than that. In fs/ext4/super.c, around line
3730, after the comment:
/* Set defaults before we parse the mount options */
Just add:
set_opt(sb, DIOREAD_NOLOCK);
This will allow system administrators to revert back to the original
method using the someone confusingly named mount option,
"dioread_lock". (Maybe we can add a alias for that mount option so
it's less confusing).
> > Yes, that's a good point. And I'm not opposed to that if it makes the life
> > simpler. But I'd like to see some performance numbers showing how much is
> > writeback using unwritten extents slower so that we don't introduce too big
> > regression with this...
> >
>
> Yes, let me try to get some performance numbers with dioread_nolock as
> the default option for buffered write on my setup.
I started running some performance runs last night, and the
interesting thing that I found was that fs_mark actually *improved*
with dioread_nolock (with fsync enabled). That may be an example of
where fixing the commit latency caused by writeback can actually show
up in a measurable way with benchmarks.
Dbench was slightly impacted; I didn't see any real differences with
compilebench or postmark. dioread_nolock did improve fio with
sequential reads; which is interesting, since I would have expected
with the inode_lock improvements, there shouldn't have been any
difference. So that may be a bit of wierdness that we should try to
understand.
See the attached tar file; open ext4-modes/index.html in a browser to
see the pretty graphs. The raw numbers are in ext4/composite.xml.
Cheers,
- Ted
[-- Attachment #2: pts.tar.xz --]
[-- Type: application/x-xz, Size: 27892 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-08 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-26 15:31 Discussion: is it time to remove dioread_nolock? Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-12-27 13:10 ` Joseph Qi
2019-12-29 15:03 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2020-01-06 12:24 ` Ritesh Harjani
2020-01-07 0:43 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-01-07 8:22 ` Jan Kara
2020-01-07 17:11 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-01-07 17:22 ` Jan Kara
2020-01-08 10:45 ` Ritesh Harjani
2020-01-08 17:42 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o [this message]
2020-01-09 9:21 ` Ritesh Harjani
2020-01-09 16:38 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-01-14 23:30 ` Ritesh Harjani
2020-01-15 16:48 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-01-16 9:46 ` Ritesh Harjani
2020-01-09 12:34 ` Jan Kara
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=20200108174259.GD263696@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riteshh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=xiaoguang.wang@linux.alibaba.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 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).