| Message ID | 552A57F8.7020002@plexistor.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 04/12/2015 02:33 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 04/10/2015 02:25 PM, Zhao Lei wrote: >> Hi, Christoph Hellwig >> <> >> >> Is there some way to speed up it(inline, or some access some variant >> in struct directly, ...)? >> > > Christoph hi > > Both node_to_bdi() and sb_is_blkdev_sb() > (and I_BDEV() && blk_get_backing_dev_info()) > Are an exported function calls. > > Can we not make blockdev_superblock->s_bdi == NULL, > and then optimize-out the call to sb_is_blkdev_sb() to only > that case. Something like: > > --- > > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c > index 32a8bbd..e0375e1 100644 > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c > @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int writeback_in_progress(struct backing_dev_info *bdi) > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(writeback_in_progress); > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > { > struct super_block *sb; > > @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > #endif > return sb->s_bdi; > } > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inode_to_bdi); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__inode_to_bdi); > > static inline struct inode *wb_inode(struct list_head *head) > { > diff --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h b/include/linux/backing-dev.h > index aff923a..7d172f5 100644 > --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h > +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h > @@ -107,7 +107,16 @@ struct backing_dev_info { > #endif > }; > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > + > +static inline > +struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > +{ > + if (!inode || !inode->i_sb) > + return __inode_to_bdi(inode); > + > + return inode->i_sb->s_bdi; > +} > This patch actually boots. Lei could you please test to see if it fixes your slowness? Thanks Boaz > int __must_check bdi_init(struct backing_dev_info *bdi); > void bdi_destroy(struct backing_dev_info *bdi); > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi, Boaz > -----Original Message----- > From: Boaz Harrosh [mailto:boaz@plexistor.com] > Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 10:39 PM > To: Boaz Harrosh; Zhao Lei; 'Christoph Hellwig' > Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org; 'Jan Kara'; 'Jens Axboe'; 'LKML' > Subject: Re: Regression caused by using node_to_bdi() > > On 04/12/2015 02:33 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > On 04/10/2015 02:25 PM, Zhao Lei wrote: > >> Hi, Christoph Hellwig > >> > <> > >> > >> Is there some way to speed up it(inline, or some access some variant > >> in struct directly, ...)? > >> > > > > Christoph hi > > > > Both node_to_bdi() and sb_is_blkdev_sb() (and I_BDEV() && > > blk_get_backing_dev_info()) Are an exported function calls. > > > > Can we not make blockdev_superblock->s_bdi == NULL, and then > > optimize-out the call to sb_is_blkdev_sb() to only that case. > > Something like: > > > > --- > > > > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c index > > 32a8bbd..e0375e1 100644 > > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c > > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c > > @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int writeback_in_progress(struct backing_dev_info > > *bdi) } EXPORT_SYMBOL(writeback_in_progress); > > > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > > { > > struct super_block *sb; > > > > @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode > > *inode) #endif > > return sb->s_bdi; > > } > > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inode_to_bdi); > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__inode_to_bdi); > > > > static inline struct inode *wb_inode(struct list_head *head) { diff > > --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h b/include/linux/backing-dev.h > > index aff923a..7d172f5 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h > > +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h > > @@ -107,7 +107,16 @@ struct backing_dev_info { #endif }; > > > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > > + > > +static inline > > +struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) { > > + if (!inode || !inode->i_sb) > > + return __inode_to_bdi(inode); > > + > > + return inode->i_sb->s_bdi; > > +} > > > > This patch actually boots. Lei could you please test to see if it fixes your > slowness? > Thanks, I'll test this patch. Thanks Zhaolei > Thanks > Boaz > > > int __must_check bdi_init(struct backing_dev_info *bdi); void > > bdi_destroy(struct backing_dev_info *bdi); > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi, Boaz > -----Original Message----- > From: Boaz Harrosh [mailto:boaz@plexistor.com] > Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 10:39 PM > To: Boaz Harrosh; Zhao Lei; 'Christoph Hellwig' > Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org; 'Jan Kara'; 'Jens Axboe'; 'LKML' > Subject: Re: Regression caused by using node_to_bdi() > > On 04/12/2015 02:33 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > On 04/10/2015 02:25 PM, Zhao Lei wrote: > >> Hi, Christoph Hellwig > >> > <> > >> > >> Is there some way to speed up it(inline, or some access some variant > >> in struct directly, ...)? > >> > > > > Christoph hi > > > > Both node_to_bdi() and sb_is_blkdev_sb() (and I_BDEV() && > > blk_get_backing_dev_info()) Are an exported function calls. > > > > Can we not make blockdev_superblock->s_bdi == NULL, and then > > optimize-out the call to sb_is_blkdev_sb() to only that case. > > Something like: > > > > --- > > > > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c index > > 32a8bbd..e0375e1 100644 > > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c > > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c > > @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int writeback_in_progress(struct backing_dev_info > > *bdi) } EXPORT_SYMBOL(writeback_in_progress); > > > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > > { > > struct super_block *sb; > > > > @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode > > *inode) #endif > > return sb->s_bdi; > > } > > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inode_to_bdi); > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__inode_to_bdi); > > > > static inline struct inode *wb_inode(struct list_head *head) { diff > > --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h b/include/linux/backing-dev.h > > index aff923a..7d172f5 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h > > +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h > > @@ -107,7 +107,16 @@ struct backing_dev_info { #endif }; > > > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > > + > > +static inline > > +struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) { > > + if (!inode || !inode->i_sb) > > + return __inode_to_bdi(inode); > > + > > + return inode->i_sb->s_bdi; > > +} > > > > This patch actually boots. Lei could you please test to see if it fixes your > slowness? > The good news is this patch passed compile and 10-time tests. The bad news is it have more performance down(strange)... v3.19-rc1 : io_speed: valcnt=10 avg=214.688 range=[211.460,216.190] diff= 2.24% stdev=1.417 cv=0.66% v4.0-rc1 : io_speed: valcnt=10 avg=204.917 range=[203.370,205.890] diff= 1.24% stdev=0.663 cv=0.32% v4.0-rc1_00001_82ad06 : io_speed: valcnt=10 avg=189.337 range=[186.280,192.060] diff= 3.10% stdev=2.305 cv=1.22% *<- this patch I applied this patch on top of v4.0-rc1. > Thanks > Boaz > > > int __must_check bdi_init(struct backing_dev_info *bdi); void > > bdi_destroy(struct backing_dev_info *bdi); > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi, Boaz > -----Original Message----- > From: Zhao Lei [mailto:zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com] > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 3:00 PM > To: 'Boaz Harrosh'; 'Christoph Hellwig' > Cc: 'linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org'; 'Jan Kara'; 'Jens Axboe'; 'LKML' > Subject: RE: Regression caused by using node_to_bdi() > > Hi, Boaz > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Boaz Harrosh [mailto:boaz@plexistor.com] > > Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 10:39 PM > > To: Boaz Harrosh; Zhao Lei; 'Christoph Hellwig' > > Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org; 'Jan Kara'; 'Jens Axboe'; 'LKML' > > Subject: Re: Regression caused by using node_to_bdi() > > > > On 04/12/2015 02:33 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > > On 04/10/2015 02:25 PM, Zhao Lei wrote: > > >> Hi, Christoph Hellwig > > >> > > <> > > >> > > >> Is there some way to speed up it(inline, or some access some > > >> variant in struct directly, ...)? > > >> > > > > > > Christoph hi > > > > > > Both node_to_bdi() and sb_is_blkdev_sb() (and I_BDEV() && > > > blk_get_backing_dev_info()) Are an exported function calls. > > > > > > Can we not make blockdev_superblock->s_bdi == NULL, and then > > > optimize-out the call to sb_is_blkdev_sb() to only that case. > > > Something like: > > > > > > --- > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c index > > > 32a8bbd..e0375e1 100644 > > > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c > > > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c > > > @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int writeback_in_progress(struct backing_dev_info > > > *bdi) } EXPORT_SYMBOL(writeback_in_progress); > > > > > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > > > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > > > { > > > struct super_block *sb; > > > > > > @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode > > > *inode) #endif > > > return sb->s_bdi; > > > } > > > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inode_to_bdi); > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__inode_to_bdi); > > > > > > static inline struct inode *wb_inode(struct list_head *head) { > > > diff --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h > > > b/include/linux/backing-dev.h index aff923a..7d172f5 100644 > > > --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h > > > @@ -107,7 +107,16 @@ struct backing_dev_info { #endif }; > > > > > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > > > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > > > + > > > +static inline > > > +struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) { > > > + if (!inode || !inode->i_sb) > > > + return __inode_to_bdi(inode); > > > + > > > + return inode->i_sb->s_bdi; > > > +} > > > > > > > This patch actually boots. Lei could you please test to see if it > > fixes your slowness? > > > The good news is this patch passed compile and 10-time tests. > The bad news is it have more performance down(strange)... > > v3.19-rc1 : io_speed: valcnt=10 avg=214.688 > range=[211.460,216.190] diff= 2.24% stdev=1.417 cv=0.66% > v4.0-rc1 : io_speed: valcnt=10 avg=204.917 > range=[203.370,205.890] diff= 1.24% stdev=0.663 cv=0.32% > v4.0-rc1_00001_82ad06 : io_speed: valcnt=10 avg=189.337 > range=[186.280,192.060] diff= 3.10% stdev=2.305 cv=1.22% *<- this patch > > I applied this patch on top of v4.0-rc1. > A new bad news: This patch make filesystem unstable. My env entered to following command line in booting after apply this patch to v4.0-rc1: Welcome to emergency mode! After logging in, type "journalctl -xb: to view System logs, ... Give root password for maintenance (or press Control-D to continue) I confirmed this error message for more than 3 times. (and confirmed no-problem without this patch) In previous performance test(which get result in my last mail), I hadn't pay attention to that message, and just type Ctrl-D and begin test. Thanks Zhaolei > > Thanks > > Boaz > > > > > int __must_check bdi_init(struct backing_dev_info *bdi); void > > > bdi_destroy(struct backing_dev_info *bdi); > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Sun 12-04-15 14:33:12, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 04/10/2015 02:25 PM, Zhao Lei wrote: > > Hi, Christoph Hellwig > > > > resend: + cc lkml, linux-fsdevel > > > > Since there is no response for my last mail, I worry that some problem in > > the mail system, please allow me to resend it. > > > > I found regression in v4.0-rc1 caused by this patch: > > Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > > Date: Wed Jan 14 10:42:36 2015 +0100 > > fs: export inode_to_bdi and use it in favor of mapping->backing_dev_info > > > <> > > Result is following: > > v3.19-rc1: testcnt=40 average=135.677 range=[132.460,139.130] stdev=1.610 cv=1.19% > > v4.0-rc1: testcnt=40 average=130.970 range=[127.980,132.050] stdev=1.012 cv=0.77% > > > > Then I bisect above case between v3.19-rc1 and v4.0-rc1, and found > > this patch caused the regresstion. > > > > Maybe it is because kernel need more time to call node_to_bdi(), > > compared with "using inode->i_mapping->backing_dev_info directly" in > > old code. > > > > Is there some way to speed up it(inline, or some access some variant > > in struct directly, ...)? > > > > Christoph hi > > Both node_to_bdi() and sb_is_blkdev_sb() > (and I_BDEV() && blk_get_backing_dev_info()) > Are an exported function calls. > > Can we not make blockdev_superblock->s_bdi == NULL, > and then optimize-out the call to sb_is_blkdev_sb() to only > that case. Something like: > > --- > > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c > index 32a8bbd..e0375e1 100644 > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c > @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int writeback_in_progress(struct backing_dev_info *bdi) > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(writeback_in_progress); > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > { > struct super_block *sb; > > @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > #endif > return sb->s_bdi; > } > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inode_to_bdi); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__inode_to_bdi); > > static inline struct inode *wb_inode(struct list_head *head) > { > diff --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h b/include/linux/backing-dev.h > index aff923a..7d172f5 100644 > --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h > +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h > @@ -107,7 +107,16 @@ struct backing_dev_info { > #endif > }; > > -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); > + > +static inline > +struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) > +{ > + if (!inode || !inode->i_sb) > + return __inode_to_bdi(inode); > + > + return inode->i_sb->s_bdi; > +} This is wrong for block-device inodes, isn't it? Honza
On 04/13/2015 03:21 PM, Jan Kara wrote: <> >> -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); >> +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); >> + >> +static inline >> +struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) >> +{ >> + if (!inode || !inode->i_sb) >> + return __inode_to_bdi(inode); >> + >> + return inode->i_sb->s_bdi; >> +} > This is wrong for block-device inodes, isn't it? Rrr yes my bad I meant +struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) +{ + if (!inode || !inode->i_sb || !inode->i_sb->s_bdi) + return __inode_to_bdi(inode); + + return inode->i_sb->s_bdi; +} I was hopping that blockdev_superblock->s_bdi == NULL because what sb_is_blkdev_sb() is doing is checking for blockdev_superblock. From code audit I do not see where it might be set but I might have missed it. Thanks Jan Boaz > > Honza > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c index 32a8bbd..e0375e1 100644 --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int writeback_in_progress(struct backing_dev_info *bdi) } EXPORT_SYMBOL(writeback_in_progress); -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) { struct super_block *sb; @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) #endif return sb->s_bdi; } -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inode_to_bdi); +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__inode_to_bdi); static inline struct inode *wb_inode(struct list_head *head) { diff --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h b/include/linux/backing-dev.h index aff923a..7d172f5 100644 --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h @@ -107,7 +107,16 @@ struct backing_dev_info { #endif }; -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode); + +static inline +struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode) +{ + if (!inode || !inode->i_sb) + return __inode_to_bdi(inode); + + return inode->i_sb->s_bdi; +} int __must_check bdi_init(struct backing_dev_info *bdi); void bdi_destroy(struct backing_dev_info *bdi);