linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>, <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	<andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>, <john.garry@huawei.com>,
	<ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<yi.zhang@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next RFC v2 2/8] blk-mq: call 'bt_wait_ptr()' later in blk_mq_get_tag()
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2022 10:09:52 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fbe5565e-4dbe-bb71-e3c4-c33eb470a8d2@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f6bcc53d-1419-7190-fd9a-8c5fa7178fe1@acm.org>

在 2022/04/08 22:20, Bart Van Assche 写道:
> On 4/8/22 00:39, Yu Kuai wrote:
>> bt_wait_ptr() will increase 'wait_index', however, if blk_mq_get_tag()
>> get a tag successfully after bt_wait_ptr() is called and before
>> sbitmap_prepare_to_wait() is called, then the 'ws' is skipped. This
>> behavior might cause 8 waitqueues to be unbalanced.
>>
>> Move bt_wait_ptr() later should reduce the problem when the disk is
>> under high io preesure.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>   block/blk-mq-tag.c | 4 +---
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/blk-mq-tag.c b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
>> index 68ac23d0b640..228a0001694f 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-mq-tag.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
>> @@ -155,7 +155,6 @@ unsigned int blk_mq_get_tag(struct 
>> blk_mq_alloc_data *data)
>>       if (data->flags & BLK_MQ_REQ_NOWAIT)
>>           return BLK_MQ_NO_TAG;
>> -    ws = bt_wait_ptr(bt, data->hctx);
>>       do {
>>           struct sbitmap_queue *bt_prev;
>> @@ -174,6 +173,7 @@ unsigned int blk_mq_get_tag(struct 
>> blk_mq_alloc_data *data)
>>           if (tag != BLK_MQ_NO_TAG)
>>               break;
>> +        ws = bt_wait_ptr(bt, data->hctx);
>>           sbitmap_prepare_to_wait(bt, ws, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
>>           tag = __blk_mq_get_tag(data, bt);
>> @@ -201,8 +201,6 @@ unsigned int blk_mq_get_tag(struct 
>> blk_mq_alloc_data *data)
>>            */
>>           if (bt != bt_prev)
>>               sbitmap_queue_wake_up(bt_prev);
>> -
>> -        ws = bt_wait_ptr(bt, data->hctx);
>>       } while (1);
> 
> Is it necessary to call bt_wait_ptr() during every loop iteration or 
> only if bt != bt_prev? Would calling bt_wait_ptr() only if bt != bt_prev 
> help to reduce unfairness further?
Hi,

You are right, that sounds reasonable.

Thanks,
Kuai
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.
> .
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-09  2:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-08  7:39 [PATCH -next RFC v2 0/8] improve tag allocation under heavy load Yu Kuai
2022-04-08  7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 1/8] sbitmap: record the number of waiters for each waitqueue Yu Kuai
2022-04-08  7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 2/8] blk-mq: call 'bt_wait_ptr()' later in blk_mq_get_tag() Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 14:20   ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09  2:09     ` yukuai (C) [this message]
2022-04-08  7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 3/8] sbitmap: make sure waitqueues are balanced Yu Kuai
2022-04-15  6:31   ` Li, Ming
2022-04-15  7:07     ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-08  7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 4/8] blk-mq: don't preempt tag under heavy load Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 14:24   ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09  2:38     ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-08  7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 5/8] sbitmap: force tag preemption if free tags are sufficient Yu Kuai
2022-04-08  7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 6/8] blk-mq: force tag preemption for split bios Yu Kuai
2022-04-08  7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 7/8] blk-mq: record how many tags are needed for splited bio Yu Kuai
2022-04-08  7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 8/8] sbitmap: wake up the number of threads based on required tags Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 14:31   ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09  2:19     ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-08 21:13   ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09  2:17     ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-09  4:16       ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09  7:01         ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-12  3:20           ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-08 19:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 0/8] improve tag allocation under heavy load Jens Axboe
2022-04-09  2:26   ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-09  2:28     ` Jens Axboe
2022-04-09  2:34       ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-09  7:14       ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-09 21:31       ` Bart Van Assche

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=fbe5565e-4dbe-bb71-e3c4-c33eb470a8d2@huawei.com \
    --to=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=yi.zhang@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).