raid5: get_active_stripe avoids device_lock
PATCH 1/1 raid5: get_active_stripe avoids device_lock
For sequential workload (or request size big workload), get_active_stripe can find cached stripe. In this case, we always hold device_lock, which exposes a lot of lock contention for such workload. If stripe count isn't 0, we don't need hold the lock actually, since we just increase its count. And this is the hot code path for such workload. Unfortunately we must delete the BUG_ON.
--- drivers/md/raid5.c | 9 ++------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
drivers/md/raid5.c +2 -7
@@ -679,14 +679,9 @@ get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, sinit_stripe (sh, sector, previous);atomic_inc (&sh->count); } - }else { + }else if (!atomic_add_unless (&sh->count,1 ,0 )) {spin_lock (&conf->device_lock); -if (atomic_read (&sh->count)) { -BUG_ON (!list_empty (&sh->lru) - && !test_bit (STRIPE_EXPANDING , &sh->state) - && !test_bit (STRIPE_ON_UNPLUG_LIST , &sh->state) - ); - }else { +if (!atomic_read (&sh->count)) {if (!test_bit (STRIPE_HANDLE , &sh->state))atomic_inc (&conf->active_stripes); BUG_ON(list_empty(&sh->lru) &&
Quoted 17 lines · On Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:05:53 +0800 Shaohua Li <[email protected]> wrote:
For sequential workload (or request size big workload),
get_active_stripecan find cached stripe. In this case, we always holddevice_lock, which exposes a lot of lock contention for such workload. If stripe count isn't 0, we don't need hold the lock actually, since we just increase its count. And this is the hot code path for such workload. Unfortunately we must delete theBUG_ON.Signed-off-by Shaohua Li <[email protected]>--- drivers/md/raid5.c | 9 ++------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)Index:
linux/drivers/md/raid5.c
===================================================================
drivers/md/raid5.c get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, s · line 682
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/md/raid5.c +1
-1@@ -679,14 +679,9 @@ get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, sinit_stripe (sh, sector, previous);atomic_inc (&sh->count); } - }else { + }else if (!atomic_add_unless (&sh->count,1 ,0 )) {
Can I be really fussy and ask you to use "atomic_inc_not_zero" rather than "atomic_add_unless" ??
I feel it makes the code a bit clearer.
Otherwise it's good - thanks.
NeilBrown
Quoted 11 lines
drivers/md/raid5.c +1
-6spin_lock (&conf->device_lock); -if (atomic_read (&sh->count)) { -BUG_ON (!list_empty (&sh->lru) - && !test_bit (STRIPE_EXPANDING , &sh->state) - && !test_bit (STRIPE_ON_UNPLUG_LIST , &sh->state) - ); - }else { +if (!atomic_read (&sh->count)) {if (!test_bit (STRIPE_HANDLE , &sh->state))atomic_inc (&conf->active_stripes); BUG_ON(list_empty(&sh->lru) &&
Quoted 14 lines · NeilBrown
Quoted 12 lines · On Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:05:53 +0800 Shaohua Li <[email protected]> wrote:
For sequential workload (or request size big workload),
get_active_stripecan find cached stripe. In this case, we always holddevice_lock, which exposes a lot of lock contention for such workload. If stripe count isn't 0, we don't need hold the lock actually, since we just increase its count. And this is the hot code path for such workload. Unfortunately we must delete theBUG_ON.Signed-off-by Shaohua Li <[email protected]>--- drivers/md/raid5.c | 9 ++------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Quoted 14 lines
drivers/md/raid5.c get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, s · line 682
Quoted 10 lines
Index:
linux/drivers/md/raid5.c
===================================================================drivers/md/raid5.c +1
-1@@ -679,14 +679,9 @@ get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, sinit_stripe (sh, sector, previous);atomic_inc (&sh->count); } - }else { + }else if (!atomic_add_unless (&sh->count,1 ,0 )) {Can I be really fussy and ask you to use "
atomic_inc_not_zero" rather than "atomic_add_unless" ??
I feel it makes the code a bit clearer.
Missed this API. Yes, it's better.
Subject: raid5: get_active_stripe avoids device_lock
For sequential workload (or request size big workload), get_active_stripe can find cached stripe. In this case, we always hold device_lock, which exposes a lot of lock contention for such workload. If stripe count isn't 0, we don't need hold the lock actually, since we just increase its count. And this is the hot code path for such workload. Unfortunately we must delete the BUG_ON.
--- drivers/md/raid5.c | 9 ++------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
drivers/md/raid5.c +2 -7
@@ -679,14 +679,9 @@ get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, sinit_stripe (sh, sector, previous);atomic_inc (&sh->count); } - }else { + }else if (!atomic_inc_not_zero (&sh->count)) {spin_lock (&conf->device_lock); -if (atomic_read (&sh->count)) { -BUG_ON (!list_empty (&sh->lru) - && !test_bit (STRIPE_EXPANDING , &sh->state) - && !test_bit (STRIPE_ON_UNPLUG_LIST , &sh->state) - ); - }else { +if (!atomic_read (&sh->count)) {if (!test_bit (STRIPE_HANDLE , &sh->state))atomic_inc (&conf->active_stripes); BUG_ON(list_empty(&sh->lru) &&
NeilBrown
AppliedQuoted 57 lines · On Wed, 9 Apr 2014 11:27:42 +0800 Shaohua Li <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 14 lines · NeilBrown
Quoted 12 lines · On Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:05:53 +0800 Shaohua Li <[email protected]> wrote:
For sequential workload (or request size big workload),
get_active_stripecan find cached stripe. In this case, we always holddevice_lock, which exposes a lot of lock contention for such workload. If stripe count isn't 0, we don't need hold the lock actually, since we just increase its count. And this is the hot code path for such workload. Unfortunately we must delete theBUG_ON.Signed-off-by Shaohua Li <[email protected]>--- drivers/md/raid5.c | 9 ++------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)Quoted 14 lines
drivers/md/raid5.c get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, s · line 682
Quoted 10 lines
Index:
linux/drivers/md/raid5.c
===================================================================drivers/md/raid5.c +1
-1@@ -679,14 +679,9 @@ get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, sinit_stripe (sh, sector, previous);atomic_inc (&sh->count); } - }else { + }else if (!atomic_add_unless (&sh->count,1 ,0 )) {Can I be really fussy and ask you to use "
atomic_inc_not_zero" rather than "atomic_add_unless" ??
I feel it makes the code a bit clearer.Missed this API. Yes, it's better.
Subject: raid5:
get_active_stripeavoidsdevice_lockFor sequential workload (or request size big workload),
get_active_stripecan find cached stripe. In this case, we always holddevice_lock, which exposes a lot of lock contention for such workload. If stripe count isn't 0, we don't need hold the lock actually, since we just increase its count. And this is the hot code path for such workload. Unfortunately we must delete theBUG_ON.Signed-off-by Shaohua Li <[email protected]>--- drivers/md/raid5.c | 9 ++------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)Index:
linux/drivers/md/raid5.c
===================================================================drivers/md/raid5.c +1
-1@@ -679,14 +679,9 @@ get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, sinit_stripe (sh, sector, previous);atomic_inc (&sh->count); } - }else { + }else if (!atomic_inc_not_zero (&sh->count)) {spin_lock (&conf->device_lock);
drivers/md/raid5.c get_active_stripe(struct r5conf *conf, s · line 687
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/md/raid5.c +1
-6-if (atomic_read (&sh->count)) { -BUG_ON (!list_empty (&sh->lru) - && !test_bit (STRIPE_EXPANDING , &sh->state) - && !test_bit (STRIPE_ON_UNPLUG_LIST , &sh->state) - ); - }else { +if (!atomic_read (&sh->count)) {if (!test_bit (STRIPE_HANDLE , &sh->state))atomic_inc (&conf->active_stripes); BUG_ON(list_empty(&sh->lru) &&
Applied, thanks.
NeilBrown