| Message ID | 390c68366acef5f3ce6ac6c5ce868826f07fd993.1481833017.git.shli@fb.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hello, On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 12:33:01PM -0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > static uint64_t tg_bps_limit(struct throtl_grp *tg, int rw) > { > struct blkcg_gq *blkg = tg_to_blkg(tg); > + struct throtl_data *td; > uint64_t ret; > > if (cgroup_subsys_on_dfl(io_cgrp_subsys) && !blkg->parent) > return U64_MAX; > - return tg->bps[rw][tg->td->limit_index]; > + > + td = tg->td; > + ret = tg->bps[rw][td->limit_index]; > + if (td->limit_index == LIMIT_MAX && tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_LOW] != > + tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_MAX]) { > + uint64_t increase; > + > + if (td->scale < 4096 && time_after_eq(jiffies, Hmm... why do we need to limit scale to 4096? As 4096 is a big number, this is only theoretical but this means that if max is more then 2048 times low, that will never be reached, right? > + td->low_upgrade_time + td->scale * td->throtl_slice)) { > + unsigned int time = jiffies - td->low_upgrade_time; > + > + td->scale = time / td->throtl_slice; > + } > + increase = (tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_LOW] >> 1) * td->scale; > + ret = min(tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_MAX], > + tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_LOW] + increase); > + } > + return ret; > } I think the code can use some comments. > static unsigned int tg_iops_limit(struct throtl_grp *tg, int rw) > { > struct blkcg_gq *blkg = tg_to_blkg(tg); > + struct throtl_data *td; > unsigned int ret; > > if (cgroup_subsys_on_dfl(io_cgrp_subsys) && !blkg->parent) > return UINT_MAX; > - return tg->iops[rw][tg->td->limit_index]; > + > + td = tg->td; > + ret = tg->iops[rw][td->limit_index]; > + if (td->limit_index == LIMIT_MAX && tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_LOW] != > + tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_MAX]) { > + uint64_t increase; > + > + if (td->scale < 4096 && time_after_eq(jiffies, > + td->low_upgrade_time + td->scale * td->throtl_slice)) { > + unsigned int time = jiffies - td->low_upgrade_time; > + > + td->scale = time / td->throtl_slice; > + } > + > + increase = (tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_LOW] >> 1) * td->scale; > + ret = min(tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_MAX], > + tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_LOW] + (unsigned int)increase); Would it be worthwhile to factor the common part into a helper? > @@ -1662,6 +1702,13 @@ static void throtl_upgrade_state(struct throtl_data *td) > > static void throtl_downgrade_state(struct throtl_data *td, int new) > { > + td->scale /= 2; > + > + if (td->scale) { > + td->low_upgrade_time = jiffies - td->scale * td->throtl_slice; > + return; > + } Cool, so linear increase and exponential backdown. Yeah, that makes sense to me but let's please document it. Thanks.
diff --git a/block/blk-throttle.c b/block/blk-throttle.c index a0ba961..6b2f365 100644 --- a/block/blk-throttle.c +++ b/block/blk-throttle.c @@ -174,6 +174,8 @@ struct throtl_data unsigned long low_upgrade_time; unsigned long low_downgrade_time; + + unsigned int scale; }; static void throtl_pending_timer_fn(unsigned long arg); @@ -228,21 +230,58 @@ static struct throtl_data *sq_to_td(struct throtl_service_queue *sq) static uint64_t tg_bps_limit(struct throtl_grp *tg, int rw) { struct blkcg_gq *blkg = tg_to_blkg(tg); + struct throtl_data *td; uint64_t ret; if (cgroup_subsys_on_dfl(io_cgrp_subsys) && !blkg->parent) return U64_MAX; - return tg->bps[rw][tg->td->limit_index]; + + td = tg->td; + ret = tg->bps[rw][td->limit_index]; + if (td->limit_index == LIMIT_MAX && tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_LOW] != + tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_MAX]) { + uint64_t increase; + + if (td->scale < 4096 && time_after_eq(jiffies, + td->low_upgrade_time + td->scale * td->throtl_slice)) { + unsigned int time = jiffies - td->low_upgrade_time; + + td->scale = time / td->throtl_slice; + } + increase = (tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_LOW] >> 1) * td->scale; + ret = min(tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_MAX], + tg->bps[rw][LIMIT_LOW] + increase); + } + return ret; } static unsigned int tg_iops_limit(struct throtl_grp *tg, int rw) { struct blkcg_gq *blkg = tg_to_blkg(tg); + struct throtl_data *td; unsigned int ret; if (cgroup_subsys_on_dfl(io_cgrp_subsys) && !blkg->parent) return UINT_MAX; - return tg->iops[rw][tg->td->limit_index]; + + td = tg->td; + ret = tg->iops[rw][td->limit_index]; + if (td->limit_index == LIMIT_MAX && tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_LOW] != + tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_MAX]) { + uint64_t increase; + + if (td->scale < 4096 && time_after_eq(jiffies, + td->low_upgrade_time + td->scale * td->throtl_slice)) { + unsigned int time = jiffies - td->low_upgrade_time; + + td->scale = time / td->throtl_slice; + } + + increase = (tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_LOW] >> 1) * td->scale; + ret = min(tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_MAX], + tg->iops[rw][LIMIT_LOW] + (unsigned int)increase); + } + return ret; } /** @@ -1645,6 +1684,7 @@ static void throtl_upgrade_state(struct throtl_data *td) td->limit_index = LIMIT_MAX; td->low_upgrade_time = jiffies; + td->scale = 0; rcu_read_lock(); blkg_for_each_descendant_post(blkg, pos_css, td->queue->root_blkg) { struct throtl_grp *tg = blkg_to_tg(blkg); @@ -1662,6 +1702,13 @@ static void throtl_upgrade_state(struct throtl_data *td) static void throtl_downgrade_state(struct throtl_data *td, int new) { + td->scale /= 2; + + if (td->scale) { + td->low_upgrade_time = jiffies - td->scale * td->throtl_slice; + return; + } + td->limit_index = new; td->low_downgrade_time = jiffies; }
When cgroups all reach low limit, cgroups can dispatch more IO. This could make some cgroups dispatch more IO but others not, and even some cgroups could dispatch less IO than their low limit. For example, cg1 low limit 10MB/s, cg2 limit 80MB/s, assume disk maximum bandwidth is 120M/s for the workload. Their bps could something like this: cg1/cg2 bps: T1: 10/80 -> T2: 60/60 -> T3: 10/80 At T1, all cgroups reach low limit, so they can dispatch more IO later. Then cg1 dispatch more IO and cg2 has no room to dispatch enough IO. At T2, cg2 only dispatches 60M/s. Since We detect cg2 dispatches less IO than its low limit 80M/s, we downgrade the queue from LIMIT_MAX to LIMIT_LOW, then all cgroups are throttled to their low limit (T3). cg2 will have bandwidth below its low limit at most time. The big problem here is we don't know the maximum bandwidth of the workload, so we can't make smart decision to avoid the situation. This patch makes cgroup bandwidth change smooth. After disk upgrades from LIMIT_LOW to LIMIT_MAX, we don't allow cgroups use all bandwidth upto their max limit immediately. Their bandwidth limit will be increased gradually to avoid above situation. So above example will became something like: cg1/cg2 bps: 10/80 -> 15/105 -> 20/100 -> 25/95 -> 30/90 -> 35/85 -> 40/80 -> 45/75 -> 22/98 In this way cgroups bandwidth will be above their limit in majority time, this still doesn't fully utilize disk bandwidth, but that's something we pay for sharing. Note this doesn't completely avoid cgroup running under its low limit. The best way to guarantee cgroup doesn't run under its limit is to set max limit. For example, if we set cg1 max limit to 40, cg2 will never run under its low limit. Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com> --- block/blk-throttle.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)