From: Martin Knoblauch <spamtrap@knobisoft.de>
To: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
jplatte@naasa.net, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: regression: 100% io-wait with 2.6.24-rcX
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:44:35 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <411558.92960.qm@web32601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (raw)
----- Original Message ----
> From: Martin Knoblauch <spamtrap@knobisoft.de>
> To: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
> Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@gmail.com>; Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>; jplatte@naasa.net; Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>; Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:52:58 PM
> Subject: Re: regression: 100% io-wait with 2.6.24-rcX
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Fengguang Wu
> > To: Martin Knoblauch
> > Cc: Mike Snitzer ; Peter
> Zijlstra
>
; jplatte@naasa.net; Ingo Molnar
> ;
>
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org"
>
; Linus
> Torvalds
>
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 1:00:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: regression: 100% io-wait with 2.6.24-rcX
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:26:41AM -0800, Martin Knoblauch wrote:
> > > > For those interested in using your writeback improvements in
> > > > production sooner rather than later (primarily with ext3); what
> > > > recommendations do you have? Just heavily test our own 2.6.24
> > +
> >
> your
> > > > evolving "close, but not ready for merge" -mm writeback patchset?
> > > >
> > > Hi Fengguang, Mike,
> > >
> > > I can add myself to Mikes question. It would be good to know
> > a
> >
> "roadmap" for the writeback changes. Testing 2.6.24-rcX so far has
> > been
> >
> showing quite nice improvement of the overall writeback situation and
> > it
> >
> would be sad to see this [partially] gone in 2.6.24-final.
> > Linus
> >
> apparently already has reverted "...2250b". I will definitely
> repeat
>
my
> > tests
> >
> with -rc8. and report.
> >
> > Thank you, Martin. Can you help test this patch on 2.6.24-rc7?
> > Maybe we can push it to 2.6.24 after your testing.
> >
> Hi Fengguang,
>
> something really bad has happened between -rc3 and
> -rc6.
>
Embarrassingly I did not catch that earlier :-(
>
> Compared to the numbers I posted
> in
>
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/10/26/208 , dd1 is now at 60 MB/sec
> (slight
>
plus), while dd2/dd3 suck the same way as in pre 2.6.24. The only
> test
>
that is still good is mix3, which I attribute to the per-BDI stuff.
>
> At the moment I am frantically trying to find when things went down.
> I
>
did run -rc8 and rc8+yourpatch. No difference to what I see with
> -rc6.
>
Sorry that I cannot provide any input to your patch.
>
OK, the change happened between rc5 and rc6. Just following a gut feeling, I reverted
#commit 81eabcbe0b991ddef5216f30ae91c4b226d54b6d
#Author: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
#Date: Mon Dec 17 16:20:05 2007 -0800
#
# mm: fix page allocation for larger I/O segments
#
# In some cases the IO subsystem is able to merge requests if the pages are
# adjacent in physical memory. This was achieved in the allocator by having
# expand() return pages in physically contiguous order in situations were a
# large buddy was split. However, list-based anti-fragmentation changed the
# order pages were returned in to avoid searching in buffered_rmqueue() for a
# page of the appropriate migrate type.
#
# This patch restores behaviour of rmqueue_bulk() preserving the physical
# order of pages returned by the allocator without incurring increased search
# costs for anti-fragmentation.
#
# Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
# Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
# Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
# Cc: Mark Lord <mlord@pobox.com
# Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
# Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
diff -urN linux-2.6.24-rc5/mm/page_alloc.c linux-2.6.24-rc6/mm/page_alloc.c
--- linux-2.6.24-rc5/mm/page_alloc.c 2007-12-21 04:14:11.305633890 +0000
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc6/mm/page_alloc.c 2007-12-21 04:14:17.746985697 +0000
@@ -847,8 +847,19 @@
struct page *page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype);
if (unlikely(page == NULL))
break;
+
+ /*
+ * Split buddy pages returned by expand() are received here
+ * in physical page order. The page is added to the callers and
+ * list and the list head then moves forward. From the callers
+ * perspective, the linked list is ordered by page number in
+ * some conditions. This is useful for IO devices that can
+ * merge IO requests if the physical pages are ordered
+ * properly.
+ */
list_add(&page->lru, list);
set_page_private(page, migratetype);
+ list = &page->lru;
}
spin_unlock(&zone->lock);
return i;
This has brought back the good results I observed and reported.
I do not know what to make out of this. At least on the systems I care
about (HP/DL380g4, dual CPUs, HT-enabled, 8 GB Memory, SmartaArray6i
controller with 4x72GB SCSI disks as RAID5 (battery protected writeback
cache enabled) and gigabit networking (tg3)) this optimisation is a dissaster.
On the other hand, it is not a regression against 2.6.22/23. Those had
bad IO scaling to. It would just be a shame to loose an apparently great
performance win.
is
Cheers
Martin
next reply other threads:[~2008-01-17 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-17 17:44 Martin Knoblauch [this message]
2008-01-17 20:23 ` regression: 100% io-wait with 2.6.24-rcX Mel Gorman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-01-23 11:12 Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-22 18:51 Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-22 15:25 Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-22 23:40 ` Alasdair G Kergon
2008-01-19 10:24 Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-18 8:19 Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-18 16:01 ` Mel Gorman
2008-01-18 17:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-18 19:01 ` Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-18 19:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-22 14:39 ` Alasdair G Kergon
2008-01-18 20:00 ` Mike Snitzer
2008-01-18 22:47 ` Mike Snitzer
2008-01-17 21:50 Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-17 22:12 ` Mel Gorman
2008-01-17 17:51 Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-17 13:52 Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-17 16:11 ` Mike Snitzer
2008-01-16 14:15 Martin Knoblauch
2008-01-16 16:27 ` Mike Snitzer
2008-01-16 9:26 Martin Knoblauch
[not found] ` <E1JF6w8-0000vs-HM@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-16 12:00 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-07 10:51 Joerg Platte
2008-01-07 11:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-07 13:24 ` Joerg Platte
2008-01-07 13:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-01-07 13:40 ` Joerg Platte
[not found] ` <E1JCRbA-0002bh-3c@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-09 3:27 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-09 6:13 ` Joerg Platte
[not found] ` <E1JCZg2-0001DE-RP@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-09 12:04 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-09 12:22 ` Joerg Platte
[not found] ` <E1JCaUd-0001Ko-Tt@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-09 12:57 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-09 13:04 ` Joerg Platte
[not found] ` <E1JCrMj-0001HR-SZ@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-10 6:58 ` Fengguang Wu
[not found] ` <E1JCrsE-0000v4-Dz@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-10 7:30 ` Fengguang Wu
[not found] ` <20080110073046.GA3432@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
[not found] ` <E1JCsDr-0002cl-0e@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-10 7:53 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-10 8:37 ` Joerg Platte
[not found] ` <E1JCt0n-00048n-AD@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-10 8:43 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-10 10:03 ` Joerg Platte
[not found] ` <E1JDBk4-0000UF-03@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-11 4:43 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-11 5:29 ` Joerg Platte
2008-01-11 6:41 ` Joerg Platte
2008-01-12 23:32 ` Joerg Platte
[not found] ` <E1JDwaA-00017Q-W6@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-13 6:44 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-13 8:05 ` Joerg Platte
[not found] ` <E1JDy5a-0001al-Tk@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-13 8:21 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-13 9:49 ` Joerg Platte
[not found] ` <E1JE1Uz-0002w5-6z@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-13 11:59 ` Fengguang Wu
[not found] ` <20080113115933.GA11045@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
[not found] ` <E1JEGPH-0001uw-Df@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-14 3:54 ` Fengguang Wu
[not found] ` <20080114035439.GA7330@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
[not found] ` <E1JEM2I-00010S-5U@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-14 9:55 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-14 11:30 ` Joerg Platte
2008-01-14 11:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
[not found] ` <E1JEOmD-0001Ap-U7@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-14 12:50 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-15 21:13 ` Mike Snitzer
[not found] ` <E1JF0m1-000101-OK@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-16 5:25 ` Fengguang Wu
2008-01-15 21:42 ` Ingo Molnar
[not found] ` <E1JF0bJ-0000zU-FG@localhost.localdomain>
2008-01-16 5:14 ` Fengguang Wu
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=411558.92960.qm@web32601.mail.mud.yahoo.com \
--to=spamtrap@knobisoft.de \
--cc=jplatte@naasa.net \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=snitzer@gmail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn \
/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).