From: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: <hch@infradead.org>, <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
<linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <houtao1@huawei.com>,
<zhengbin13@huawei.com>, <yi.zhang@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] iomap: fix race between readahead and direct write
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2020 14:55:14 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fafa0550-184c-e59c-9b79-bd5d716a20cc@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200119061402.GA7301@bombadil.infradead.org>
On 2020/1/19 14:14, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> I don't understand your reasoning here. If another process wants to
> access a page of the file which isn't currently in cache, it would have
> to first read the page in from storage. If it's under readahead, it
> has to wait for the read to finish. Why is the second case worse than
> the second? It seems better to me.
Thanks for your response! My worries is that, for example:
We read page 0, and trigger readahead to read n pages(0 - n-1). While in
another thread, we read page n-1.
In the current implementation, if readahead is in the process of reading
page 0 - n-2, later operation doesn't need to wait the former one to
finish. However, later operation will have to wait if we add all pages
to page cache first. And that is why I said it might cause problem for
performance overhead.
> At the same time, the iomap code is switched from ->readpages to
> ->readahead, so yes, the pages are added to the page cache.
Yes, it's not a problem in your implementation.
Thanks!
Yu Kuai
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-19 6:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-16 6:36 [RFC] iomap: fix race between readahead and direct write yu kuai
2020-01-16 15:32 ` Jan Kara
2020-01-17 9:39 ` yukuai (C)
2020-01-17 11:05 ` Jan Kara
2020-01-17 16:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-19 1:25 ` yukuai (C)
2020-01-19 1:17 ` yukuai (C)
2020-01-20 11:42 ` Jan Kara
2020-01-18 23:08 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-01-19 1:34 ` yukuai (C)
2020-01-19 1:42 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-01-19 1:57 ` yukuai (C)
2020-01-19 2:51 ` yukuai (C)
2020-01-19 3:01 ` Gao Xiang
2020-01-19 3:15 ` yukuai (C)
2020-01-19 6:14 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-01-19 6:55 ` yukuai (C) [this message]
2020-01-19 7:58 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-01-19 11:21 ` yukuai (C)
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=fafa0550-184c-e59c-9b79-bd5d716a20cc@huawei.com \
--to=yukuai3@huawei.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=houtao1@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=zhengbin13@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 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).