block: export latency info for cgroups
Subsystems (2)
cover block: export latency info for cgroups
From: Shaohua Li <[email protected]>
Hi,
latency info is a good sign to determine if IO is healthy. The patches export such info to cgroup io.stat.
Thanks,
Shaohua
Shaohua Li (2):
block: record blkcss in request
blockcg: export latency info for each cgroup
block/blk-cgroup.c | 29 +++++++++++++- block/blk-core.c | 12 ++++++ block/blk-stat.c | 95 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- block/blk.h | 5 +++ include/linux/blk-cgroup.h | 7 ++++ include/linux/blkdev.h | 1 + 6 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
2.9.5
RFC 1/2 block: record blkcss in request
From: Shaohua Li <[email protected]>
Currently we record block css info in bio but not in request. Normally we can get a request's css from its bio, but in some situations, we can't access request's bio, for example, after blk_update_request. Add the css to request, so we can access css through the life cycle of a request.
--- block/blk-core.c | 12 ++++++++++++ include/linux/blkdev.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
block/blk-core.c +12 -0
@@ -1551,6 +1551,11 @@ void __blk_put_request(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req)return ; } +#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_CGROUP +if (req->css) +css_put (req->css); +#endif +lockdep_assert_held (q->queue_lock);blk_pm_put_request (req);
@@ -3094,6 +3099,13 @@ void blk_rq_bio_prep(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq, rq->rq_flags |=RQF_QUIET ;if (bio->bi_disk) rq->rq_disk = bio->bi_disk; +#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_CGROUP + rq->css =NULL ; +if (bio->bi_css) { + rq->css = bio->bi_css; +css_get (rq->css); + } +#endif }#if ARCH_IMPLEMENTS_FLUSH_DCACHE_PAGE
include/linux/blkdev.h +1 -0
@@ -208,6 +208,7 @@ struct request {struct request_list *rl;/* rl this rq is alloced from */ unsigned long long start_time_ns;unsigned long long io_start_time_ns;/* when passed to hardware */ +struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;#endif /* Number of scatter-gather DMA addr+len pairs after * physical address coalescing is performed.
Signature · 1 line
2.9.5
Tejun Heo
maintainerRe: [RFC 1/2] block: record blkcss in request
Hello, Shaohua.
Quoted 7 lines · Shaohua Li
From: Shaohua Li <[email protected]>
Currently we record block css info in bio but not in request. Normally we can get a request's css from its bio, but in some situations, we can't access request's bio, for example, after
blk_update_request. Add the css to request, so we can access css through the life cycle of a request.
Each request comes from cgroup specific request_list, so given a request, its blkcg membership can is accessible through
request->rl->blkg->blkcg
Thanks.
Signature · 1 line
tejun
Re: [RFC 1/2] block: record blkcss in request
Quoted 11 lines · Tejun Heo
Hello, Shaohua.
Quoted 7 lines · Shaohua Li
From: Shaohua Li <[email protected]>
Currently we record block css info in bio but not in request. Normally we can get a request's css from its bio, but in some situations, we can't access request's bio, for example, after
blk_update_request. Add the css to request, so we can access css through the life cycle of a request.
Quoted 4 lines
Each request comes from cgroup specific
request_list, so given a request, its blkcg membership can is accessible throughrequest->rl->blkg->blkcg
Nice. Seems only used for legacy queue though.
Thanks,
Shaohua
Tejun Heo
maintainerRe: [RFC 1/2] block: record blkcss in request
Quoted 6 lines · Shaohua Li
Quoted 4 lines
Each request comes from cgroup specific
request_list, so given a request, its blkcg membership can is accessible throughrequest->rl->blkg->blkcgNice. Seems only used for legacy queue though.
Ah, you're right. rl isn't used for mq at all, so yeah, we probably should propagate the association through rq.
Thanks.
Signature · 1 line
tejun
RFC 2/2 blockcg: export latency info for each cgroup
In reply to Shaohua LiFrom: Shaohua Li <[email protected]>
Export the latency info to user. The latency is a good sign to indicate if IO is congested or not. User can use the info to make decisions like adjust cgroup settings.
Existing io.stat shows accumulated IO bytes and requests, but accumulated value for latency doesn't make much sense. This patch exports the latency info in a 100ms interval.
A micro benchmark running fio test against null_blk in a third level cgroup shows around 4% regression. If I only do the latency accouting for leaf cgroup, the regression seems to disappear. So not quite sure if we should do the accounting for intermediate nodes or if the whole thing should be enabled optionally.
With this patch, the io.stat will show:
8:0 rbytes=7282688 wbytes=0 rios=83 wios=0 rlat_mean=2720 rlat_min=183 rlat_max=14880 wlat_mean=0 wlat_min=0 wlat_max=0 The new fields will display read/write average/minimum/maximum latency
within 100ms. The latency is us.
--- block/blk-cgroup.c | 29 +++++++++++++- block/blk-stat.c | 95 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- block/blk.h | 5 +++ include/linux/blk-cgroup.h | 7 ++++ 4 files changed, 133 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
block/blk-cgroup.c +27 -2
@@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ static void blkg_free(struct blkcg_gq *blkg)blkg_rwstat_exit (&blkg->stat_ios);blkg_rwstat_exit (&blkg->stat_bytes); +blkg_rq_stat_exit (blkg);kfree (blkg); }
@@ -104,6 +105,8 @@ static struct blkcg_gq *blkg_alloc(struct blkcg *blkcg, struct request_queue *q, blkg_rwstat_init(&blkg->stat_ios, gfp_mask)) goto err_free; +if (blkg_rq_stat_init (blkg, gfp_mask)) + goto err_free; blkg->q = q;INIT_LIST_HEAD (&blkg->q_node); blkg->blkcg = blkcg;
@@ -952,6 +955,8 @@ static int blkcg_print_stat(struct seq_file *sf, void *v)const char *dname;struct blkg_rwstat rwstat;u64 rbytes, wbytes, rios, wios; +u64 rmean =0 , rmin =0 , rmax =0 ; +u64 wmean =0 , wmin =0 , wmax =0 ; dname =blkg_dev_name (blkg);if (!dname)
@@ -969,11 +974,30 @@ static int blkcg_print_stat(struct seq_file *sf, void *v) rios =atomic64_read (&rwstat.aux_cnt[BLKG_RWSTAT_READ ]); wios =atomic64_read (&rwstat.aux_cnt[BLKG_RWSTAT_WRITE ]); +if (blkg->rq_stat.stat[0 ].nr_samples) { + rmean = blkg->rq_stat.stat[0 ].mean; +do_div (rmean,1000 ); + rmin = blkg->rq_stat.stat[0 ].min; +do_div (rmin,1000 ); + rmax = blkg->rq_stat.stat[0 ].max; +do_div (rmax,1000 ); + } +if (blkg->rq_stat.stat[1 ].nr_samples) { + wmean = blkg->rq_stat.stat[1 ].mean; +do_div (wmean,1000 ); + wmin = blkg->rq_stat.stat[1 ].min; +do_div (wmin,1000 ); + wmax = blkg->rq_stat.stat[1 ].max; +do_div (wmax,1000 ); + }spin_unlock_irq (blkg->q->queue_lock);if (rbytes || wbytes || rios || wios) -seq_printf (sf,"%s rbytes=%llu wbytes=%llu rios=%llu wios=%llu\n" , - dname, rbytes, wbytes, rios, wios); +seq_printf (sf,"%s rbytes=%llu wbytes=%llu rios=%llu wios=%llu " +"rlat_mean=%llu rlat_min=%llu rlat_max=%llu " +"wlat_mean=%llu wlat_min=%llu wlat_max=%llu\n" , + dname, rbytes, wbytes, rios, wios, + rmean, rmin, rmax, wmean, wmin, wmax); }rcu_read_unlock ();
@@ -1167,6 +1191,7 @@ int blkcg_init_queue(struct request_queue *q)blkg_destroy_all (q);spin_unlock_irq (q->queue_lock); } +blk_stat_enable_accounting (q);return ret; }
block/blk-stat.c +94 -1
120 lines not on this page · raw message
block/blk.h +5 -0
@@ -309,6 +309,11 @@ static inline void blk_throtl_bio_endio(struct bio *bio) { }static inline void blk_throtl_stat_add (struct request *rq,u64 time) { }#endif +#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_CGROUP +extern int blkg_rq_stat_init (struct blkcg_gq *blkg,gfp_t gfp); +extern void blkg_rq_stat_exit (struct blkcg_gq *blkg); +#endif +#ifdef CONFIG_BOUNCE extern int init_emergency_isa_pool (void );extern void blk_queue_bounce (struct request_queue *q,struct bio **bio);
include/linux/blk-cgroup.h +7 -0
@@ -102,6 +102,12 @@ struct blkcg_policy_data {int plid; }; +struct blkcg_gq_rq_stat { +u64 last_flush_time; +struct blk_rq_stat stat[2 ]; +struct blk_rq_stat __percpu *cpu_stat; +}; +/* association between a blk cgroup and a request queue */ struct blkcg_gq {/* Pointer to the associated request_queue */
@@ -130,6 +136,7 @@ struct blkcg_gq {struct blkg_rwstat stat_bytes;struct blkg_rwstat stat_ios; +struct blkcg_gq_rq_stat rq_stat;struct blkg_policy_data *pd[BLKCG_MAX_POLS ];
Signature · 1 line
2.9.5
Tejun Heo
maintainerRe: [RFC 2/2] blockcg: export latency info for each cgroup
Hello,
Quoted 3 lines · Shaohua Li
Export the latency info to user. The latency is a good sign to indicate if IO is congested or not. User can use the info to make decisions like adjust cgroup settings.
Nice, yeah, this can be really useful.
Quoted 3 lines
Existing io.stat shows accumulated IO bytes and requests, but accumulated value for latency doesn't make much sense. This patch exports the latency info in a 100ms interval.
We probably want running avg of a few intervals.
Quoted 2 lines
A micro benchmark running fio test against
null_blkin a third level cgroup shows around 4% regression. If I only do the latency accouting
Heh, that's quite a bit.
Quoted 3 lines
for leaf cgroup, the regression seems to disappear. So not quite sure if we should do the accounting for intermediate nodes or if the whole thing should be enabled optionally.
I suspect that if we make the calculations and propagations lazy, the overhead will likely become negligible. Can you please take a look at how the basic resource accounting code in kernel/cgroup/stat.c? It's an infra code for collecting stats without burdening hot path. It's currently only used for CPU but we can easily expand it to cover other resources. Having to do running avgs might interfere with the lazy propagation a bit but I think we can make it work if we make the right trade-offs.
Thanks.
Signature · 1 line
tejun
Re: [RFC 2/2] blockcg: export latency info for each cgroup
Quoted 24 lines · Tejun Heo
Hello,
Quoted 3 lines · Shaohua Li
Export the latency info to user. The latency is a good sign to indicate if IO is congested or not. User can use the info to make decisions like adjust cgroup settings.
Nice, yeah, this can be really useful.
Quoted 3 lines
Existing io.stat shows accumulated IO bytes and requests, but accumulated value for latency doesn't make much sense. This patch exports the latency info in a 100ms interval.
We probably want running avg of a few intervals.
Quoted 2 lines
A micro benchmark running fio test against
null_blkin a third level cgroup shows around 4% regression. If I only do the latency accoutingHeh, that's quite a bit.
Quoted 3 lines
for leaf cgroup, the regression seems to disappear. So not quite sure if we should do the accounting for intermediate nodes or if the whole thing should be enabled optionally.
Quoted 8 lines
I suspect that if we make the calculations and propagations lazy, the overhead will likely become negligible. Can you please take a look at how the basic resource accounting code in
kernel/cgroup/stat.c? It's an infra code for collecting stats without burdening hot path. It's currently only used for CPU but we can easily expand it to cover other resources. Having to do running avgs might interfere with the lazy propagation a bit but I think we can make it work if we make the right trade-offs.
Looks that is similar to how io.stat exposes bytes/ios. It does the propagation at the time when user read the status file. However, doing the same for latency is meaningless, we shouldn't accumulate latency for a long time. If we want to do it lazily, alternatives are:
- export total requests and total latency. User can calculate the average in any interval. We can't export min/max latency then.
- export avg/min/max since last time when user reads io.stat. We clear all statistics once user reads io.stat and re-account from scratch.
Thanks,
Shaohua
Tejun Heo
maintainerRe: [RFC 2/2] blockcg: export latency info for each cgroup
Hello, Shaohua.
Quoted 8 lines · Shaohua Li
Looks that is similar to how io.stat exposes bytes/ios. It does the propagation at the time when user read the status file. However, doing the same for latency is meaningless, we shouldn't accumulate latency for a long time. If we want to do it lazily, alternatives are:
- export total requests and total latency. User can calculate the average in any interval. We can't export min/max latency then.
- export avg/min/max since last time when user reads io.stat. We clear all statistics once user reads io.stat and re-account from scratch.
I think there are more options than the above, especially given that the propagation up the tree doens't have to be completely accurate. For example, you can combine multiple averages values after the fact if you also remember the relative weights each should carry and combining after the fact is trivial for min/max.
Can you please take a look at how loadavg does calculations lazily and look into a bit more about how the propagation up the tree can be lazily done?
Thanks.
Signature · 1 line
tejun