From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6959DC28CBC for ; Thu, 7 May 2020 03:03:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 394292068E for ; Thu, 7 May 2020 03:03:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="OfpvWa2L"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="NfMXBssb" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 394292068E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jWWp4-0004Gb-Lv; Thu, 07 May 2020 03:03:42 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jWWp3-0004GU-CJ for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 07 May 2020 03:03:41 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=OXBS/eJwVEDf689WQ3iDMkGTOPqUnoxN1bFe7sb0k18=; b=OfpvWa2L5bOfWlUjcwTq205FX9 iYW+lnbtkyjqqQnSbvUIxm4BYrQW1PT3Dq1k5K4jkkFkpZ2QwQkesYvk/l6sNaLYTw5yKuh3TNXkx UIwO2UpWagJZfNy5fqVGzi5TqwtZQOouhe7y+IvwAgsegWDIY3VzMNyji12AalDkFVb0=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=OXBS/eJwVEDf689WQ3iDMkGTOPqUnoxN1bFe7sb0k18=; b=NfMXBssb48UZBcaLaVtBIgVMZr rbCJGUuTPp233cn4E3kSekPGu2U/09GhC7kSHFgRgTTeaeRM1ssgcRj+LZUFIht7UqS71hJYX1uYZ 5JF81HRJCRZJZh57yOvleplF4EF8XZfl8DxNsIUPl3IxOSf2aGGMksDoiw6sWUZT2BaE=; Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191] helo=huawei.com) by sfi-mx-4.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1jWWoz-00Df4p-80 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 07 May 2020 03:03:41 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS401-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 0FB04998E81665E6A654; Thu, 7 May 2020 11:03:30 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.487.0; Thu, 7 May 2020 11:03:28 +0800 To: Jaegeuk Kim References: <20200506104542.123575-1-yuchao0@huawei.com> <20200506150521.GE107238@google.com> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 May 2020 11:03:25 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200506150521.GE107238@google.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Headers-End: 1jWWoz-00Df4p-80 Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2] f2fs: shrink spinlock coverage X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On 2020/5/6 23:05, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 05/06, Chao Yu wrote: >> In f2fs_try_to_free_nids(), .nid_list_lock spinlock critical region will >> increase as expected shrink number increase, to avoid spining other CPUs >> for long time, it's better to implement like extent cache and nats >> shrinker. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu >> --- >> v2: >> - fix unlock wrong spinlock. >> fs/f2fs/node.c | 15 +++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/node.c b/fs/f2fs/node.c >> index 4da0d8713df5..ad0b14f4dab8 100644 >> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c >> @@ -2488,7 +2488,6 @@ void f2fs_alloc_nid_failed(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, nid_t nid) >> int f2fs_try_to_free_nids(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int nr_shrink) >> { >> struct f2fs_nm_info *nm_i = NM_I(sbi); >> - struct free_nid *i, *next; >> int nr = nr_shrink; >> >> if (nm_i->nid_cnt[FREE_NID] <= MAX_FREE_NIDS) >> @@ -2498,14 +2497,22 @@ int f2fs_try_to_free_nids(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int nr_shrink) >> return 0; >> >> spin_lock(&nm_i->nid_list_lock); >> - list_for_each_entry_safe(i, next, &nm_i->free_nid_list, list) { >> - if (nr_shrink <= 0 || >> - nm_i->nid_cnt[FREE_NID] <= MAX_FREE_NIDS) >> + while (nr_shrink) { >> + struct free_nid *i; >> + >> + if (nm_i->nid_cnt[FREE_NID] <= MAX_FREE_NIDS) >> break; >> >> + i = list_first_entry(&nm_i->free_nid_list, >> + struct free_nid, list); >> + list_del(&i->list); >> + spin_unlock(&nm_i->nid_list_lock); >> + >> __remove_free_nid(sbi, i, FREE_NID); > > __remove_free_nid() will do list_del again. btw, how about just splitting out Oh, my bad. How about moving __remove_free_nid into .nid_list_lock coverage? > given nr_shrink into multiple trials? Like this? while (shrink) { batch = DEFAULT_BATCH_NUMBER; // 16 spinlock(); list_for_each_entry_safe() { if (!shrink || !batch) break; remove_item_from_list; shrink--; batch--; } spin_unlock(); } Thanks, > >> kmem_cache_free(free_nid_slab, i); >> nr_shrink--; >> + >> + spin_lock(&nm_i->nid_list_lock); >> } >> spin_unlock(&nm_i->nid_list_lock); >> mutex_unlock(&nm_i->build_lock); >> -- >> 2.18.0.rc1 > . > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel