Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1520181
| From | Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/8] block: add scalable completion tracking of requests |
| Date | 2016-11-12 06:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sCz33-6bf-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <sBx3k-5iD-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <sBx3k-5iD-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <sBHcl-3eV-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sBHcl-3eV-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <sC3mx-29W-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 11/10/2016 12:38 PM, Jan Kara wrote: > On Wed 09-11-16 12:52:25, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 11/09/2016 09:09 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 11/09/2016 02:01 AM, Jan Kara wrote: >>>> On Tue 08-11-16 08:25:52, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> On 11/08/2016 06:30 AM, Jan Kara wrote: >>>>>> On Tue 01-11-16 15:08:49, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>>>> For legacy block, we simply track them in the request queue. For >>>>>>> blk-mq, we track them on a per-sw queue basis, which we can then >>>>>>> sum up through the hardware queues and finally to a per device >>>>>>> state. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The stats are tracked in, roughly, 0.1s interval windows. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Add sysfs files to display the stats. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> This patch looks mostly good to me but I have one concern: You track >>>>>> statistics in a fixed 134ms window, stats get cleared at the >>>>>> beginning of >>>>>> each window. Now this can interact with the writeback window and >>>>>> latency >>>>>> settings which are dynamic and settable from userspace - so if the >>>>>> writeback code observation window gets set larger than the stats >>>>>> window, >>>>>> things become strange since you'll likely miss quite some observations >>>>>> about read latencies. So I think you need to make sure stats window is >>>>>> always larger than writeback window. Or actually, why do you have >>>>>> something >>>>>> like stats window and don't leave clearing of statistics completely >>>>>> to the >>>>>> writeback tracking code? >>>>> >>>>> That's a good point, and there actually used to be a comment to that >>>>> effect in the code. I think the best solution here would be to make the >>>>> stats code mask available somewhere, and allow a consumer of the stats >>>>> to request a larger window. >>>>> >>>>> Similarly, we could make the stat window be driven by the consumer, as >>>>> you suggest. >>>>> >>>>> Currently there are two pending submissions that depend on the stats >>>>> code. One is this writeback series, and the other one is the hybrid >>>>> polling code. The latter does not really care about the window size as >>>>> such, since it has no monitoring window of its own, and it wants the >>>>> auto-clearing as well. >>>>> >>>>> I don't mind working on additions for this, but I'd prefer if we could >>>>> layer them on top of the existing series instead of respinning it. >>>>> There's considerable test time on the existing patchset. Would that work >>>>> for you? Especially collapsing the stats and wbt windows would require >>>>> some re-architecting. >>>> >>>> OK, that works for me. Actually, when thinking about this, I have one >>>> more >>>> suggestion: Do we really want to expose the wbt window as a sysfs >>>> tunable? >>>> I guess it is good for initial experiments but longer term having the wbt >>>> window length be a function of target read latency might be better. >>>> Generally you want the window length to be considerably larger than the >>>> target latency but OTOH not too large so that the algorithm can react >>>> reasonably quickly so that suggests it could really be autotuned (and we >>>> scale the window anyway to adapt it to current situation). >>> >>> That's not a bad idea, I have thought about that as well before. We >>> don't need the window tunable, and you are right, it can be a function >>> of the desired latency. >>> >>> I'll hardwire the 100msec latency window for now and get rid of the >>> exposed tunable. It's harder to remove sysfs files once they have made >>> it into the kernel... >> >> Killed the sysfs variable, so for now it'll be a 100msec window by >> default. > > OK, I guess good enough to get this merged. Thanks Jan! -- Jens Axboe
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCHSET] Throttled buffered writeback Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> - 2016-11-01 22:20 +0100
[PATCH 3/8] writeback: mark background writeback as such Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> - 2016-11-01 22:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 3/8] writeback: mark background writeback as such Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2016-11-02 16:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 3/8] writeback: mark background writeback as such Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-11-05 23:30 +0100
[PATCH 4/8] writeback: track if we're sleeping on progress in balance_dirty_pages() Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> - 2016-11-01 22:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 4/8] writeback: track if we're sleeping on progress in balance_dirty_pages() Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2016-11-02 16:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 4/8] writeback: track if we're sleeping on progress in balance_dirty_pages() Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-11-08 14:10 +0100
[PATCH 6/8] block: add scalable completion tracking of requests Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> - 2016-11-01 22:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/8] block: add scalable completion tracking of requests Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-11-08 14:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/8] block: add scalable completion tracking of requests Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-11-09 10:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/8] block: add scalable completion tracking of requests Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> - 2016-11-09 21:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/8] block: add scalable completion tracking of requests Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-11-10 20:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/8] block: add scalable completion tracking of requests Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> - 2016-11-12 06:30 +0100
[PATCH 2/8] writeback: add wbc_to_write_flags() Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> - 2016-11-01 22:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/8] writeback: add wbc_to_write_flags() Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2016-11-02 16:00 +0100
[PATCH 7/8] blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> - 2016-11-01 22:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 7/8] blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-11-08 14:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 7/8] blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> - 2016-11-08 16:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 7/8] blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-11-09 09:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 7/8] blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> - 2016-11-09 17:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 7/8] blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> - 2016-11-09 21:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 7/8] blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-11-10 20:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 7/8] blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> - 2016-11-10 01:10 +0100
[PATCH 8/8] block: hook up writeback throttling Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> - 2016-11-01 22:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 8/8] block: hook up writeback throttling Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-11-08 14:50 +0100
csiph-web