2019-05-19 13:08:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-10-15 22:01:59 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-04-29 08:43:23 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-04-29 08:43:23 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:54 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-04-29 08:43:23 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-22 14:38:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-08-04 05:55:10 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2016-08-25 15:17:17 -07:00
|
|
|
|
include cleanup: Update gfp.h and slab.h includes to prepare for breaking implicit slab.h inclusion from percpu.h
percpu.h is included by sched.h and module.h and thus ends up being
included when building most .c files. percpu.h includes slab.h which
in turn includes gfp.h making everything defined by the two files
universally available and complicating inclusion dependencies.
percpu.h -> slab.h dependency is about to be removed. Prepare for
this change by updating users of gfp and slab facilities include those
headers directly instead of assuming availability. As this conversion
needs to touch large number of source files, the following script is
used as the basis of conversion.
http://userweb.kernel.org/~tj/misc/slabh-sweep.py
The script does the followings.
* Scan files for gfp and slab usages and update includes such that
only the necessary includes are there. ie. if only gfp is used,
gfp.h, if slab is used, slab.h.
* When the script inserts a new include, it looks at the include
blocks and try to put the new include such that its order conforms
to its surrounding. It's put in the include block which contains
core kernel includes, in the same order that the rest are ordered -
alphabetical, Christmas tree, rev-Xmas-tree or at the end if there
doesn't seem to be any matching order.
* If the script can't find a place to put a new include (mostly
because the file doesn't have fitting include block), it prints out
an error message indicating which .h file needs to be added to the
file.
The conversion was done in the following steps.
1. The initial automatic conversion of all .c files updated slightly
over 4000 files, deleting around 700 includes and adding ~480 gfp.h
and ~3000 slab.h inclusions. The script emitted errors for ~400
files.
2. Each error was manually checked. Some didn't need the inclusion,
some needed manual addition while adding it to implementation .h or
embedding .c file was more appropriate for others. This step added
inclusions to around 150 files.
3. The script was run again and the output was compared to the edits
from #2 to make sure no file was left behind.
4. Several build tests were done and a couple of problems were fixed.
e.g. lib/decompress_*.c used malloc/free() wrappers around slab
APIs requiring slab.h to be added manually.
5. The script was run on all .h files but without automatically
editing them as sprinkling gfp.h and slab.h inclusions around .h
files could easily lead to inclusion dependency hell. Most gfp.h
inclusion directives were ignored as stuff from gfp.h was usually
wildly available and often used in preprocessor macros. Each
slab.h inclusion directive was examined and added manually as
necessary.
6. percpu.h was updated not to include slab.h.
7. Build test were done on the following configurations and failures
were fixed. CONFIG_GCOV_KERNEL was turned off for all tests (as my
distributed build env didn't work with gcov compiles) and a few
more options had to be turned off depending on archs to make things
build (like ipr on powerpc/64 which failed due to missing writeq).
* x86 and x86_64 UP and SMP allmodconfig and a custom test config.
* powerpc and powerpc64 SMP allmodconfig
* sparc and sparc64 SMP allmodconfig
* ia64 SMP allmodconfig
* s390 SMP allmodconfig
* alpha SMP allmodconfig
* um on x86_64 SMP allmodconfig
8. percpu.h modifications were reverted so that it could be applied as
a separate patch and serve as bisection point.
Given the fact that I had only a couple of failures from tests on step
6, I'm fairly confident about the coverage of this conversion patch.
If there is a breakage, it's likely to be something in one of the arch
headers which should be easily discoverable easily on most builds of
the specific arch.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Guess-its-ok-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>
2010-03-24 17:04:11 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2011-10-16 02:01:52 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2006-12-10 02:19:40 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-09-21 09:19:54 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2022-09-15 10:41:56 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2012-05-29 15:06:43 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2016-01-14 15:22:01 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2018-07-03 11:15:03 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2018-08-29 08:41:29 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:58 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2025-09-08 16:55:34 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2014-04-07 15:37:55 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-01-14 10:42:36 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2007-10-16 01:24:33 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2006-01-30 08:53:33 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2026-05-12 13:31:35 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 05:35:55 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 14:15:59 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2010-04-19 10:04:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 05:35:55 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:18 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-09-15 10:41:56 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-04-19 10:04:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:44 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-04 19:10:15 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 14:15:59 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-06-07 15:45:53 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-04 19:10:15 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 14:15:59 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-06-07 15:45:53 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:44 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-04-29 08:43:23 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2022-04-29 11:53:28 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-04-19 10:04:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-09-15 10:41:56 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:18 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-20 08:47:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-20 08:47:43 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-08-27 17:52:43 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-20 08:47:43 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-20 08:47:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:14 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-02-02 07:06:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:14 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:14 -07:00
|
|
|
|
mm: don't set readahead flag on a folio when lookahead_size > nr_to_read
The readahead flag is set on a folio based on the lookahead_size and
nr_to_read. For example, when the readahead happens from index to index +
nr_to_read, then the readahead `mark` offset from index is set at
nr_to_read - lookahead_size.
There are some scenarios where the lookahead_size > nr_to_read. For
example, readahead window was created, but the file was truncated before
the readahead starts. do_page_cache_ra() will clamp the nr_to_read if the
readahead window extends beyond EOF after truncation. If this happens,
readahead flag should not be set on any folio on the current readahead
window.
The current calculation for `mark` with mapping_min_order > 0 gives
incorrect results when lookahead_size > nr_to_read due to rounding up
operation:
index = 128
nr_to_read = 16
lookahead_size = 28
mapping_min_order = 4 (16 pages)
ra_folio_index = round_up(128 + 16 - 28, 16) = 128;
mark = 128 - 128 = 0; # offset from index to set RA flag
In the above example, the lookahead_size is actually lying outside the
current readahead window. Without this patch, RA flag will be set
incorrectly on the folio at index 128. This can lead to marking the
readahead flag on the wrong folio, therefore, triggering a readahead when
it is not necessary.
Explicitly initialize `mark` to be ULONG_MAX and only calculate it when
lookahead_size is within the readahead window.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241017062342.478973-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com
Fixes: 26cfdb395eef ("readahead: allocate folios with mapping_min_order in readahead")
Signed-off-by: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2024-10-17 08:23:42 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2016-07-26 15:24:53 -07:00
|
|
|
|
mm: don't set readahead flag on a folio when lookahead_size > nr_to_read
The readahead flag is set on a folio based on the lookahead_size and
nr_to_read. For example, when the readahead happens from index to index +
nr_to_read, then the readahead `mark` offset from index is set at
nr_to_read - lookahead_size.
There are some scenarios where the lookahead_size > nr_to_read. For
example, readahead window was created, but the file was truncated before
the readahead starts. do_page_cache_ra() will clamp the nr_to_read if the
readahead window extends beyond EOF after truncation. If this happens,
readahead flag should not be set on any folio on the current readahead
window.
The current calculation for `mark` with mapping_min_order > 0 gives
incorrect results when lookahead_size > nr_to_read due to rounding up
operation:
index = 128
nr_to_read = 16
lookahead_size = 28
mapping_min_order = 4 (16 pages)
ra_folio_index = round_up(128 + 16 - 28, 16) = 128;
mark = 128 - 128 = 0; # offset from index to set RA flag
In the above example, the lookahead_size is actually lying outside the
current readahead window. Without this patch, RA flag will be set
incorrectly on the folio at index 128. This can lead to marking the
readahead flag on the wrong folio, therefore, triggering a readahead when
it is not necessary.
Explicitly initialize `mark` to be ULONG_MAX and only calculate it when
lookahead_size is within the readahead window.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241017062342.478973-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com
Fixes: 26cfdb395eef ("readahead: allocate folios with mapping_min_order in readahead")
Signed-off-by: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2024-10-17 08:23:42 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:58 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-02-02 07:06:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-09-08 16:55:34 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm: don't set readahead flag on a folio when lookahead_size > nr_to_read
The readahead flag is set on a folio based on the lookahead_size and
nr_to_read. For example, when the readahead happens from index to index +
nr_to_read, then the readahead `mark` offset from index is set at
nr_to_read - lookahead_size.
There are some scenarios where the lookahead_size > nr_to_read. For
example, readahead window was created, but the file was truncated before
the readahead starts. do_page_cache_ra() will clamp the nr_to_read if the
readahead window extends beyond EOF after truncation. If this happens,
readahead flag should not be set on any folio on the current readahead
window.
The current calculation for `mark` with mapping_min_order > 0 gives
incorrect results when lookahead_size > nr_to_read due to rounding up
operation:
index = 128
nr_to_read = 16
lookahead_size = 28
mapping_min_order = 4 (16 pages)
ra_folio_index = round_up(128 + 16 - 28, 16) = 128;
mark = 128 - 128 = 0; # offset from index to set RA flag
In the above example, the lookahead_size is actually lying outside the
current readahead window. Without this patch, RA flag will be set
incorrectly on the folio at index 128. This can lead to marking the
readahead flag on the wrong folio, therefore, triggering a readahead when
it is not necessary.
Explicitly initialize `mark` to be ULONG_MAX and only calculate it when
lookahead_size is within the readahead window.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241017062342.478973-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com
Fixes: 26cfdb395eef ("readahead: allocate folios with mapping_min_order in readahead")
Signed-off-by: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2024-10-17 08:23:42 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2021-03-10 16:06:51 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2024-03-22 17:35:54 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2021-03-10 16:06:51 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2018-06-01 09:03:06 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:54 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-01 09:03:06 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 05:35:55 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-05-12 13:31:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2018-06-01 09:03:06 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-20 08:47:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-03-10 16:06:51 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-03-22 17:35:54 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-03-10 16:06:51 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2024-03-22 17:35:54 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 05:35:55 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-05-12 13:31:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2021-03-10 16:06:51 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2022-09-15 10:41:56 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-04-29 11:53:28 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 05:35:55 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:58 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:14 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:17 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-24 23:26:14 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:17 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2026-02-02 07:06:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:17 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2026-02-02 07:06:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-05-08 11:12:31 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2026-05-08 11:12:31 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2026-02-02 07:06:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:17 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2026-02-02 07:06:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:24 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2021-04-07 21:18:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:24 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2021-04-07 21:18:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
mm: don't cap request size based on read-ahead setting
We ran into a funky issue, where someone doing 256K buffered reads saw
128K requests at the device level. Turns out it is read-ahead capping
the request size, since we use 128K as the default setting. This
doesn't make a lot of sense - if someone is issuing 256K reads, they
should see 256K reads, regardless of the read-ahead setting, if the
underlying device can support a 256K read in a single command.
This patch introduces a bdi hint, io_pages. This is the soft max IO
size for the lower level, I've hooked it up to the bdev settings here.
Read-ahead is modified to issue the maximum of the user request size,
and the read-ahead max size, but capped to the max request size on the
device side. The latter is done to avoid reading ahead too much, if the
application asks for a huge read. With this patch, the kernel behaves
like the application expects.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1479498073-8657-1-git-send-email-axboe@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-12-12 16:43:26 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:54 +02:00
|
|
|
|
mm: don't cap request size based on read-ahead setting
We ran into a funky issue, where someone doing 256K buffered reads saw
128K requests at the device level. Turns out it is read-ahead capping
the request size, since we use 128K as the default setting. This
doesn't make a lot of sense - if someone is issuing 256K reads, they
should see 256K reads, regardless of the read-ahead setting, if the
underlying device can support a 256K read in a single command.
This patch introduces a bdi hint, io_pages. This is the soft max IO
size for the lower level, I've hooked it up to the bdev settings here.
Read-ahead is modified to issue the maximum of the user request size,
and the read-ahead max size, but capped to the max request size on the
device side. The latter is done to avoid reading ahead too much, if the
application asks for a huge read. With this patch, the kernel behaves
like the application expects.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1479498073-8657-1-git-send-email-axboe@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-12-12 16:43:26 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2022-04-29 11:53:28 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:10 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
mm: don't cap request size based on read-ahead setting
We ran into a funky issue, where someone doing 256K buffered reads saw
128K requests at the device level. Turns out it is read-ahead capping
the request size, since we use 128K as the default setting. This
doesn't make a lot of sense - if someone is issuing 256K reads, they
should see 256K reads, regardless of the read-ahead setting, if the
underlying device can support a 256K read in a single command.
This patch introduces a bdi hint, io_pages. This is the soft max IO
size for the lower level, I've hooked it up to the bdev settings here.
Read-ahead is modified to issue the maximum of the user request size,
and the read-ahead max size, but capped to the max request size on the
device side. The latter is done to avoid reading ahead too much, if the
application asks for a huge read. With this patch, the kernel behaves
like the application expects.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1479498073-8657-1-git-send-email-axboe@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-12-12 16:43:26 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:24 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros
PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time
ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page
cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE.
This promise never materialized. And unlikely will.
We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to
PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether
PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case,
especially on the border between fs and mm.
Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much
breakage to be doable.
Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are
not.
The changes are pretty straight-forward:
- <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;
- <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;
- PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN};
- page_cache_get() -> get_page();
- page_cache_release() -> put_page();
This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using
script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files.
I've called spatch for them manually.
The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to
PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later.
There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll
fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also
will be addressed with the separate patch.
virtual patch
@@
expression E;
@@
- E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E
@@
expression E;
@@
- E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT
+ PAGE_SHIFT
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SIZE
+ PAGE_SIZE
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_MASK
+ PAGE_MASK
@@
expression E;
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E)
+ PAGE_ALIGN(E)
@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_get(E)
+ get_page(E)
@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_release(E)
+ put_page(E)
Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:24 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2014-01-29 14:05:51 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-11-05 13:43:47 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2018-12-28 00:33:34 -08:00
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-12-28 00:33:34 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-10-16 01:24:33 -07:00
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-27 23:25:35 +08:00
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-20 08:47:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-01-04 09:58:39 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2022-04-27 17:01:28 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-09-15 10:41:56 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2022-09-15 10:41:56 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-24 23:26:14 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2025-06-09 10:27:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-04 19:10:16 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-06-19 12:28:51 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2026-05-08 11:12:31 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-04-26 19:29:38 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-09 10:27:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2025-09-08 16:55:34 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2025-06-09 10:27:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2025-06-09 10:27:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2026-05-08 11:12:31 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:09 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-27 10:39:50 +10:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2025-06-09 10:27:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-04-26 19:29:38 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-06-20 19:05:36 +10:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 16:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 16:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 05:35:55 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2022-06-20 19:05:36 +10:00
|
|
|
|
2024-04-26 19:29:38 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-04 19:10:16 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-04 19:10:16 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-02-05 11:27:01 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:21 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-16 15:31:33 -07:00
|
|
|
|
mm: don't cap request size based on read-ahead setting
We ran into a funky issue, where someone doing 256K buffered reads saw
128K requests at the device level. Turns out it is read-ahead capping
the request size, since we use 128K as the default setting. This
doesn't make a lot of sense - if someone is issuing 256K reads, they
should see 256K reads, regardless of the read-ahead setting, if the
underlying device can support a 256K read in a single command.
This patch introduces a bdi hint, io_pages. This is the soft max IO
size for the lower level, I've hooked it up to the bdev settings here.
Read-ahead is modified to issue the maximum of the user request size,
and the read-ahead max size, but capped to the max request size on the
device side. The latter is done to avoid reading ahead too much, if the
application asks for a huge read. With this patch, the kernel behaves
like the application expects.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1479498073-8657-1-git-send-email-axboe@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-12-12 16:43:26 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:59 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm: don't cap request size based on read-ahead setting
We ran into a funky issue, where someone doing 256K buffered reads saw
128K requests at the device level. Turns out it is read-ahead capping
the request size, since we use 128K as the default setting. This
doesn't make a lot of sense - if someone is issuing 256K reads, they
should see 256K reads, regardless of the read-ahead setting, if the
underlying device can support a 256K read in a single command.
This patch introduces a bdi hint, io_pages. This is the soft max IO
size for the lower level, I've hooked it up to the bdev settings here.
Read-ahead is modified to issue the maximum of the user request size,
and the read-ahead max size, but capped to the max request size on the
device side. The latter is done to avoid reading ahead too much, if the
application asks for a huge read. With this patch, the kernel behaves
like the application expects.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1479498073-8657-1-git-send-email-axboe@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-12-12 16:43:26 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2025-09-08 16:55:34 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-16 15:31:33 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-16 15:31:33 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:10 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-10-16 01:24:34 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:19:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:19:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2020-06-01 21:46:29 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-16 15:31:33 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:19:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-16 15:31:33 -07:00
|
|
|
|
readahead: introduce context readahead algorithm
Introduce page cache context based readahead algorithm.
This is to better support concurrent read streams in general.
RATIONALE
---------
The current readahead algorithm detects interleaved reads in a _passive_ way.
Given a sequence of interleaved streams 1,1001,2,1002,3,4,1003,5,1004,1005,6,...
By checking for (offset == prev_offset + 1), it will discover the sequentialness
between 3,4 and between 1004,1005, and start doing sequential readahead for the
individual streams since page 4 and page 1005.
The context readahead algorithm guarantees to discover the sequentialness no
matter how the streams are interleaved. For the above example, it will start
sequential readahead since page 2 and 1002.
The trick is to poke for page @offset-1 in the page cache when it has no other
clues on the sequentialness of request @offset: if the current requenst belongs
to a sequential stream, that stream must have accessed page @offset-1 recently,
and the page will still be cached now. So if page @offset-1 is there, we can
take request @offset as a sequential access.
BENEFICIARIES
-------------
- strictly interleaved reads i.e. 1,1001,2,1002,3,1003,...
the current readahead will take them as silly random reads;
the context readahead will take them as two sequential streams.
- cooperative IO processes i.e. NFS and SCST
They create a thread pool, farming off (sequential) IO requests to different
threads which will be performing interleaved IO.
It was not easy(or possible) to reliably tell from file->f_ra all those
cooperative processes working on the same sequential stream, since they will
have different file->f_ra instances. And NFSD's file->f_ra is particularly
unusable, since their file objects are dynamically created for each request.
The nfsd does have code trying to restore the f_ra bits, but not satisfactory.
The new scheme is to detect the sequential pattern via looking up the page
cache, which provides one single and consistent view of the pages recently
accessed. That makes sequential detection for cooperative processes possible.
USER REPORT
-----------
Vladislav recommends the addition of context readahead as a result of his SCST
benchmarks. It leads to 6%~40% performance gains in various cases and achieves
equal performance in others. http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/19/239
OVERHEADS
---------
In theory, it introduces one extra page cache lookup per random read. However
the below benchmark shows context readahead to be slightly faster, wondering..
Randomly reading 200MB amount of data on a sparse file, repeat 20 times for
each block size. The average throughputs are:
original ra context ra gain
4K random reads: 65.561MB/s 65.648MB/s +0.1%
16K random reads: 124.767MB/s 124.951MB/s +0.1%
64K random reads: 162.123MB/s 162.278MB/s +0.1%
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@vlnb.net>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-06-16 15:31:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:59 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-16 15:31:33 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:59 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-16 15:31:33 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:59 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2025-06-09 10:27:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:21 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2025-06-09 10:27:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
readahead: on-demand readahead logic
This is a minimal readahead algorithm that aims to replace the current one.
It is more flexible and reliable, while maintaining almost the same behavior
and performance. Also it is full integrated with adaptive readahead.
It is designed to be called on demand:
- on a missing page, to do synchronous readahead
- on a lookahead page, to do asynchronous readahead
In this way it eliminated the awkward workarounds for cache hit/miss,
readahead thrashing, retried read, and unaligned read. It also adopts the
data structure introduced by adaptive readahead, parameterizes readahead
pipelining with `lookahead_index', and reduces the current/ahead windows to
one single window.
HEURISTICS
The logic deals with four cases:
- sequential-next
found a consistent readahead window, so push it forward
- random
standalone small read, so read as is
- sequential-first
create a new readahead window for a sequential/oversize request
- lookahead-clueless
hit a lookahead page not associated with the readahead window,
so create a new readahead window and ramp it up
In each case, three parameters are determined:
- readahead index: where the next readahead begins
- readahead size: how much to readahead
- lookahead size: when to do the next readahead (for pipelining)
BEHAVIORS
The old behaviors are maximally preserved for trivial sequential/random reads.
Notable changes are:
- It no longer imposes strict sequential checks.
It might help some interleaved cases, and clustered random reads.
It does introduce risks of a random lookahead hit triggering an
unexpected readahead. But in general it is more likely to do good
than to do evil.
- Interleaved reads are supported in a minimal way.
Their chances of being detected and proper handled are still low.
- Readahead thrashings are better handled.
The current readahead leads to tiny average I/O sizes, because it
never turn back for the thrashed pages. They have to be fault in
by do_generic_mapping_read() one by one. Whereas the on-demand
readahead will redo readahead for them.
OVERHEADS
The new code reduced the overheads of
- excessively calling the readahead routine on small sized reads
(the current readahead code insists on seeing all requests)
- doing a lot of pointless page-cache lookups for small cached files
(the current readahead only turns itself off after 256 cache hits,
unfortunately most files are < 1MB, so never see that chance)
That accounts for speedup of
- 0.3% on 1-page sequential reads on sparse file
- 1.2% on 1-page cache hot sequential reads
- 3.2% on 256-page cache hot sequential reads
- 1.3% on cache hot `tar /lib`
However, it does introduce one extra page-cache lookup per cache miss, which
impacts random reads slightly. That's 1% overheads for 1-page random reads on
sparse file.
PERFORMANCE
The basic benchmark setup is
- 2.6.20 kernel with on-demand readahead
- 1MB max readahead size
- 2.9GHz Intel Core 2 CPU
- 2GB memory
- 160G/8M Hitachi SATA II 7200 RPM disk
The benchmarks show that
- it maintains the same performance for trivial sequential/random reads
- sysbench/OLTP performance on MySQL gains up to 8%
- performance on readahead thrashing gains up to 3 times
iozone throughput (KB/s): roughly the same
==========================================
iozone -c -t1 -s 4096m -r 64k
2.6.20 on-demand gain
first run
" Initial write " 61437.27 64521.53 +5.0%
" Rewrite " 47893.02 48335.20 +0.9%
" Read " 62111.84 62141.49 +0.0%
" Re-read " 62242.66 62193.17 -0.1%
" Reverse Read " 50031.46 49989.79 -0.1%
" Stride read " 8657.61 8652.81 -0.1%
" Random read " 13914.28 13898.23 -0.1%
" Mixed workload " 19069.27 19033.32 -0.2%
" Random write " 14849.80 14104.38 -5.0%
" Pwrite " 62955.30 65701.57 +4.4%
" Pread " 62209.99 62256.26 +0.1%
second run
" Initial write " 60810.31 66258.69 +9.0%
" Rewrite " 49373.89 57833.66 +17.1%
" Read " 62059.39 62251.28 +0.3%
" Re-read " 62264.32 62256.82 -0.0%
" Reverse Read " 49970.96 50565.72 +1.2%
" Stride read " 8654.81 8638.45 -0.2%
" Random read " 13901.44 13949.91 +0.3%
" Mixed workload " 19041.32 19092.04 +0.3%
" Random write " 14019.99 14161.72 +1.0%
" Pwrite " 64121.67 68224.17 +6.4%
" Pread " 62225.08 62274.28 +0.1%
In summary, writes are unstable, reads are pretty close on average:
access pattern 2.6.20 on-demand gain
Read 62085.61 62196.38 +0.2%
Re-read 62253.49 62224.99 -0.0%
Reverse Read 50001.21 50277.75 +0.6%
Stride read 8656.21 8645.63 -0.1%
Random read 13907.86 13924.07 +0.1%
Mixed workload 19055.29 19062.68 +0.0%
Pread 62217.53 62265.27 +0.1%
aio-stress: roughly the same
============================
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o1 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
aio-stress -l -s4096 -r128 -t1 -o3 knoppix511-dvd-cn.iso
2.6.20 on-demand delta
sequential 92.57s 92.54s -0.0%
random 311.87s 312.15s +0.1%
sysbench fileio: roughly the same
=================================
sysbench --test=fileio --file-io-mode=async --file-test-mode=rndrw \
--file-total-size=4G --file-block-size=64K \
--num-threads=001 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand delta
first run
1 59.1974s 59.2262s +0.0%
2 58.0575s 58.2269s +0.3%
4 48.0545s 47.1164s -2.0%
8 41.0684s 41.2229s +0.4%
16 35.8817s 36.4448s +1.6%
32 32.6614s 32.8240s +0.5%
64 23.7601s 24.1481s +1.6%
128 24.3719s 23.8225s -2.3%
256 23.2366s 22.0488s -5.1%
second run
1 59.6720s 59.5671s -0.2%
8 41.5158s 41.9541s +1.1%
64 25.0200s 23.9634s -4.2%
256 22.5491s 20.9486s -7.1%
Note that the numbers are not very stable because of the writes.
The overall performance is close when we sum all seconds up:
sum all up 495.046s 491.514s -0.7%
sysbench oltp (trans/sec): up to 8% gain
========================================
sysbench --test=oltp --oltp-table-size=10000000 --oltp-read-only \
--mysql-socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock \
--mysql-user=root --mysql-password=readahead \
--num-threads=064 --max-requests=10000 --max-time=900 run
10000-transactions run
threads 2.6.20 on-demand gain
1 62.81 64.56 +2.8%
2 67.97 70.93 +4.4%
4 81.81 85.87 +5.0%
8 94.60 97.89 +3.5%
16 99.07 104.68 +5.7%
32 95.93 104.28 +8.7%
64 96.48 103.68 +7.5%
5000-transactions run
1 48.21 48.65 +0.9%
8 68.60 70.19 +2.3%
64 70.57 74.72 +5.9%
2000-transactions run
1 37.57 38.04 +1.3%
2 38.43 38.99 +1.5%
4 45.39 46.45 +2.3%
8 51.64 52.36 +1.4%
16 54.39 55.18 +1.5%
32 52.13 54.49 +4.5%
64 54.13 54.61 +0.9%
That's interesting results. Some investigations show that
- MySQL is accessing the db file non-uniformly: some parts are
more hot than others
- It is mostly doing 4-page random reads, and sometimes doing two
reads in a row, the latter one triggers a 16-page readahead.
- The on-demand readahead leaves many lookahead pages (flagged
PG_readahead) there. Many of them will be hit, and trigger
more readahead pages. Which might save more seeks.
- Naturally, the readahead windows tend to lie in hot areas,
and the lookahead pages in hot areas is more likely to be hit.
- The more overall read density, the more possible gain.
That also explains the adaptive readahead tricks for clustered random reads.
readahead thrashing: 3 times better
===================================
We boot kernel with "mem=128m single", and start a 100KB/s stream on every
second, until reaching 200 streams.
max throughput min avg I/O size
2.6.20: 5MB/s 16KB
on-demand: 15MB/s 140KB
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-07-19 01:48:01 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:28 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:28 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2021-05-27 12:30:54 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm/readahead: terminate async readahead on natural boundary
Previously asynchonous readahead would read ra_pages (usually 128K)
directly after the end of the synchonous readahead and given the
synchronous readahead portion had no alignment guarantees (beyond page
boundaries) it is possible (and likely) that the end of the initial 128K
region would not fall on a natural boundary for the folio size being used.
Therefore smaller folios were used to align down to the required
boundary, both at the end of the previous readahead block and at the start
of the new one.
In the worst cases, this can result in never properly ramping up the folio
size, and instead getting stuck oscillating between order-0, -1 and -2
folios. The next readahead will try to use folios whose order is +2
bigger than the folio that had the readahead marker. But because of the
alignment requirements, that folio (the first one in the readahead block)
can end up being order-0 in some cases.
There will be 2 modifications to solve this issue:
1) Calculate the readahead size so the end is aligned to a folio
boundary. This prevents needing to allocate small folios to align
down at the end of the window and fixes the oscillation problem.
2) Remember the "preferred folio order" in the ra state instead of
inferring it from the folio with the readahead marker. This solves
the slow ramp up problem (discussed in a subsequent patch).
This patch addresses (1) only. A subsequent patch will address (2).
Worked example:
The following shows the previous pathalogical behaviour when the initial
synchronous readahead is unaligned. We start reading at page 17 in the
file and read sequentially from there. I'm showing a dump of the pages in
the page cache just after we read the first page of the folio with the
readahead marker.
Initially there are no pages in the page cache:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00800000 8388608 0 2048 2048
Then we access page 17, causing synchonous read-around of 128K with a
readahead marker set up at page 25. So far, all as expected:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00001000 4096 0 1 1
FOLIO 0x00001000 0x00002000 4096 1 2 1 0
FOLIO 0x00002000 0x00003000 4096 2 3 1 0
FOLIO 0x00003000 0x00004000 4096 3 4 1 0
FOLIO 0x00004000 0x00005000 4096 4 5 1 0
FOLIO 0x00005000 0x00006000 4096 5 6 1 0
FOLIO 0x00006000 0x00007000 4096 6 7 1 0
FOLIO 0x00007000 0x00008000 4096 7 8 1 0
FOLIO 0x00008000 0x00009000 4096 8 9 1 0
FOLIO 0x00009000 0x0000a000 4096 9 10 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000a000 0x0000b000 4096 10 11 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000b000 0x0000c000 4096 11 12 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000c000 0x0000d000 4096 12 13 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000d000 0x0000e000 4096 13 14 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000e000 0x0000f000 4096 14 15 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000f000 0x00010000 4096 15 16 1 0
FOLIO 0x00010000 0x00011000 4096 16 17 1 0
FOLIO 0x00011000 0x00012000 4096 17 18 1 0
FOLIO 0x00012000 0x00013000 4096 18 19 1 0
FOLIO 0x00013000 0x00014000 4096 19 20 1 0
FOLIO 0x00014000 0x00015000 4096 20 21 1 0
FOLIO 0x00015000 0x00016000 4096 21 22 1 0
FOLIO 0x00016000 0x00017000 4096 22 23 1 0
FOLIO 0x00017000 0x00018000 4096 23 24 1 0
FOLIO 0x00018000 0x00019000 4096 24 25 1 0
FOLIO 0x00019000 0x0001a000 4096 25 26 1 0 Y
FOLIO 0x0001a000 0x0001b000 4096 26 27 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001b000 0x0001c000 4096 27 28 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001c000 0x0001d000 4096 28 29 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001d000 0x0001e000 4096 29 30 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001e000 0x0001f000 4096 30 31 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001f000 0x00020000 4096 31 32 1 0
FOLIO 0x00020000 0x00021000 4096 32 33 1 0
HOLE 0x00021000 0x00800000 8253440 33 2048 2015
Now access pages 18-25 inclusive. This causes an asynchronous 128K
readahead starting at page 33. But since we are unaligned, even though
the preferred folio order is 2, the first folio in this batch (the one
with the new readahead marker) is order-0:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00001000 4096 0 1 1
FOLIO 0x00001000 0x00002000 4096 1 2 1 0
FOLIO 0x00002000 0x00003000 4096 2 3 1 0
FOLIO 0x00003000 0x00004000 4096 3 4 1 0
FOLIO 0x00004000 0x00005000 4096 4 5 1 0
FOLIO 0x00005000 0x00006000 4096 5 6 1 0
FOLIO 0x00006000 0x00007000 4096 6 7 1 0
FOLIO 0x00007000 0x00008000 4096 7 8 1 0
FOLIO 0x00008000 0x00009000 4096 8 9 1 0
FOLIO 0x00009000 0x0000a000 4096 9 10 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000a000 0x0000b000 4096 10 11 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000b000 0x0000c000 4096 11 12 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000c000 0x0000d000 4096 12 13 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000d000 0x0000e000 4096 13 14 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000e000 0x0000f000 4096 14 15 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000f000 0x00010000 4096 15 16 1 0
FOLIO 0x00010000 0x00011000 4096 16 17 1 0
FOLIO 0x00011000 0x00012000 4096 17 18 1 0
FOLIO 0x00012000 0x00013000 4096 18 19 1 0
FOLIO 0x00013000 0x00014000 4096 19 20 1 0
FOLIO 0x00014000 0x00015000 4096 20 21 1 0
FOLIO 0x00015000 0x00016000 4096 21 22 1 0
FOLIO 0x00016000 0x00017000 4096 22 23 1 0
FOLIO 0x00017000 0x00018000 4096 23 24 1 0
FOLIO 0x00018000 0x00019000 4096 24 25 1 0
FOLIO 0x00019000 0x0001a000 4096 25 26 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001a000 0x0001b000 4096 26 27 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001b000 0x0001c000 4096 27 28 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001c000 0x0001d000 4096 28 29 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001d000 0x0001e000 4096 29 30 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001e000 0x0001f000 4096 30 31 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001f000 0x00020000 4096 31 32 1 0
FOLIO 0x00020000 0x00021000 4096 32 33 1 0
FOLIO 0x00021000 0x00022000 4096 33 34 1 0 Y
FOLIO 0x00022000 0x00024000 8192 34 36 2 1
FOLIO 0x00024000 0x00028000 16384 36 40 4 2
FOLIO 0x00028000 0x0002c000 16384 40 44 4 2
FOLIO 0x0002c000 0x00030000 16384 44 48 4 2
FOLIO 0x00030000 0x00034000 16384 48 52 4 2
FOLIO 0x00034000 0x00038000 16384 52 56 4 2
FOLIO 0x00038000 0x0003c000 16384 56 60 4 2
FOLIO 0x0003c000 0x00040000 16384 60 64 4 2
FOLIO 0x00040000 0x00041000 4096 64 65 1 0
HOLE 0x00041000 0x00800000 8122368 65 2048 1983
Which means that when we now read pages 26-33 and readahead is kicked off
again, the new preferred order is 2 (0 + 2), not 4 as we intended:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00001000 4096 0 1 1
FOLIO 0x00001000 0x00002000 4096 1 2 1 0
FOLIO 0x00002000 0x00003000 4096 2 3 1 0
FOLIO 0x00003000 0x00004000 4096 3 4 1 0
FOLIO 0x00004000 0x00005000 4096 4 5 1 0
FOLIO 0x00005000 0x00006000 4096 5 6 1 0
FOLIO 0x00006000 0x00007000 4096 6 7 1 0
FOLIO 0x00007000 0x00008000 4096 7 8 1 0
FOLIO 0x00008000 0x00009000 4096 8 9 1 0
FOLIO 0x00009000 0x0000a000 4096 9 10 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000a000 0x0000b000 4096 10 11 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000b000 0x0000c000 4096 11 12 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000c000 0x0000d000 4096 12 13 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000d000 0x0000e000 4096 13 14 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000e000 0x0000f000 4096 14 15 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000f000 0x00010000 4096 15 16 1 0
FOLIO 0x00010000 0x00011000 4096 16 17 1 0
FOLIO 0x00011000 0x00012000 4096 17 18 1 0
FOLIO 0x00012000 0x00013000 4096 18 19 1 0
FOLIO 0x00013000 0x00014000 4096 19 20 1 0
FOLIO 0x00014000 0x00015000 4096 20 21 1 0
FOLIO 0x00015000 0x00016000 4096 21 22 1 0
FOLIO 0x00016000 0x00017000 4096 22 23 1 0
FOLIO 0x00017000 0x00018000 4096 23 24 1 0
FOLIO 0x00018000 0x00019000 4096 24 25 1 0
FOLIO 0x00019000 0x0001a000 4096 25 26 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001a000 0x0001b000 4096 26 27 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001b000 0x0001c000 4096 27 28 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001c000 0x0001d000 4096 28 29 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001d000 0x0001e000 4096 29 30 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001e000 0x0001f000 4096 30 31 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001f000 0x00020000 4096 31 32 1 0
FOLIO 0x00020000 0x00021000 4096 32 33 1 0
FOLIO 0x00021000 0x00022000 4096 33 34 1 0
FOLIO 0x00022000 0x00024000 8192 34 36 2 1
FOLIO 0x00024000 0x00028000 16384 36 40 4 2
FOLIO 0x00028000 0x0002c000 16384 40 44 4 2
FOLIO 0x0002c000 0x00030000 16384 44 48 4 2
FOLIO 0x00030000 0x00034000 16384 48 52 4 2
FOLIO 0x00034000 0x00038000 16384 52 56 4 2
FOLIO 0x00038000 0x0003c000 16384 56 60 4 2
FOLIO 0x0003c000 0x00040000 16384 60 64 4 2
FOLIO 0x00040000 0x00041000 4096 64 65 1 0
FOLIO 0x00041000 0x00042000 4096 65 66 1 0 Y
FOLIO 0x00042000 0x00044000 8192 66 68 2 1
FOLIO 0x00044000 0x00048000 16384 68 72 4 2
FOLIO 0x00048000 0x0004c000 16384 72 76 4 2
FOLIO 0x0004c000 0x00050000 16384 76 80 4 2
FOLIO 0x00050000 0x00054000 16384 80 84 4 2
FOLIO 0x00054000 0x00058000 16384 84 88 4 2
FOLIO 0x00058000 0x0005c000 16384 88 92 4 2
FOLIO 0x0005c000 0x00060000 16384 92 96 4 2
FOLIO 0x00060000 0x00061000 4096 96 97 1 0
HOLE 0x00061000 0x00800000 7991296 97 2048 1951
This ramp up from order-0 with smaller orders at the edges for alignment
cycle continues all the way to the end of the file (not shown).
After the change, we round down the end boundary to the order boundary so
we no longer get stuck in the cycle and can ramp up the order over time.
Note that the rate of the ramp up is still not as we would expect it. We
will fix that next. Here we are touching pages 17-256 sequentially:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00001000 4096 0 1 1
FOLIO 0x00001000 0x00002000 4096 1 2 1 0
FOLIO 0x00002000 0x00003000 4096 2 3 1 0
FOLIO 0x00003000 0x00004000 4096 3 4 1 0
FOLIO 0x00004000 0x00005000 4096 4 5 1 0
FOLIO 0x00005000 0x00006000 4096 5 6 1 0
FOLIO 0x00006000 0x00007000 4096 6 7 1 0
FOLIO 0x00007000 0x00008000 4096 7 8 1 0
FOLIO 0x00008000 0x00009000 4096 8 9 1 0
FOLIO 0x00009000 0x0000a000 4096 9 10 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000a000 0x0000b000 4096 10 11 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000b000 0x0000c000 4096 11 12 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000c000 0x0000d000 4096 12 13 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000d000 0x0000e000 4096 13 14 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000e000 0x0000f000 4096 14 15 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000f000 0x00010000 4096 15 16 1 0
FOLIO 0x00010000 0x00011000 4096 16 17 1 0
FOLIO 0x00011000 0x00012000 4096 17 18 1 0
FOLIO 0x00012000 0x00013000 4096 18 19 1 0
FOLIO 0x00013000 0x00014000 4096 19 20 1 0
FOLIO 0x00014000 0x00015000 4096 20 21 1 0
FOLIO 0x00015000 0x00016000 4096 21 22 1 0
FOLIO 0x00016000 0x00017000 4096 22 23 1 0
FOLIO 0x00017000 0x00018000 4096 23 24 1 0
FOLIO 0x00018000 0x00019000 4096 24 25 1 0
FOLIO 0x00019000 0x0001a000 4096 25 26 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001a000 0x0001b000 4096 26 27 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001b000 0x0001c000 4096 27 28 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001c000 0x0001d000 4096 28 29 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001d000 0x0001e000 4096 29 30 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001e000 0x0001f000 4096 30 31 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001f000 0x00020000 4096 31 32 1 0
FOLIO 0x00020000 0x00021000 4096 32 33 1 0
FOLIO 0x00021000 0x00022000 4096 33 34 1 0
FOLIO 0x00022000 0x00024000 8192 34 36 2 1
FOLIO 0x00024000 0x00028000 16384 36 40 4 2
FOLIO 0x00028000 0x0002c000 16384 40 44 4 2
FOLIO 0x0002c000 0x00030000 16384 44 48 4 2
FOLIO 0x00030000 0x00034000 16384 48 52 4 2
FOLIO 0x00034000 0x00038000 16384 52 56 4 2
FOLIO 0x00038000 0x0003c000 16384 56 60 4 2
FOLIO 0x0003c000 0x00040000 16384 60 64 4 2
FOLIO 0x00040000 0x00044000 16384 64 68 4 2
FOLIO 0x00044000 0x00048000 16384 68 72 4 2
FOLIO 0x00048000 0x0004c000 16384 72 76 4 2
FOLIO 0x0004c000 0x00050000 16384 76 80 4 2
FOLIO 0x00050000 0x00054000 16384 80 84 4 2
FOLIO 0x00054000 0x00058000 16384 84 88 4 2
FOLIO 0x00058000 0x0005c000 16384 88 92 4 2
FOLIO 0x0005c000 0x00060000 16384 92 96 4 2
FOLIO 0x00060000 0x00070000 65536 96 112 16 4
FOLIO 0x00070000 0x00080000 65536 112 128 16 4
FOLIO 0x00080000 0x000a0000 131072 128 160 32 5
FOLIO 0x000a0000 0x000c0000 131072 160 192 32 5
FOLIO 0x000c0000 0x000e0000 131072 192 224 32 5
FOLIO 0x000e0000 0x00100000 131072 224 256 32 5
FOLIO 0x00100000 0x00120000 131072 256 288 32 5
FOLIO 0x00120000 0x00140000 131072 288 320 32 5 Y
HOLE 0x00140000 0x00800000 7077888 320 2048 1728
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250609092729.274960-3-ryan.roberts@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Chaitanya S Prakash <chaitanyas.prakash@arm.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-06-09 10:27:24 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-31 15:02:34 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-05-27 12:30:54 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-09-08 16:55:34 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2021-05-27 12:30:54 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2018-07-03 11:15:03 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-07-10 14:04:51 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm/readahead: fix large folio support in async readahead
When testing large folio support with XFS on our servers, we observed that
only a few large folios are mapped when reading large files via mmap.
After a thorough analysis, I identified it was caused by the
`/sys/block/*/queue/read_ahead_kb` setting. On our test servers, this
parameter is set to 128KB. After I tune it to 2MB, the large folio can
work as expected. However, I believe the large folio behavior should not
be dependent on the value of read_ahead_kb. It would be more robust if
the kernel can automatically adopt to it.
With /sys/block/*/queue/read_ahead_kb set to 128KB and performing a
sequential read on a 1GB file using MADV_HUGEPAGE, the differences in
/proc/meminfo are as follows:
- before this patch
FileHugePages: 18432 kB
FilePmdMapped: 4096 kB
- after this patch
FileHugePages: 1067008 kB
FilePmdMapped: 1048576 kB
This shows that after applying the patch, the entire 1GB file is mapped to
huge pages. The stable list is CCed, as without this patch, large folios
don't function optimally in the readahead path.
It's worth noting that if read_ahead_kb is set to a larger value that
isn't aligned with huge page sizes (e.g., 4MB + 128KB), it may still fail
to map to hugepages.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241108141710.9721-1-laoar.shao@gmail.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241206083025.3478-1-laoar.shao@gmail.com
Fixes: 4687fdbb805a ("mm/filemap: Support VM_HUGEPAGE for file mappings")
Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Tested-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2024-12-06 16:30:25 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-09 10:27:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm/readahead: terminate async readahead on natural boundary
Previously asynchonous readahead would read ra_pages (usually 128K)
directly after the end of the synchonous readahead and given the
synchronous readahead portion had no alignment guarantees (beyond page
boundaries) it is possible (and likely) that the end of the initial 128K
region would not fall on a natural boundary for the folio size being used.
Therefore smaller folios were used to align down to the required
boundary, both at the end of the previous readahead block and at the start
of the new one.
In the worst cases, this can result in never properly ramping up the folio
size, and instead getting stuck oscillating between order-0, -1 and -2
folios. The next readahead will try to use folios whose order is +2
bigger than the folio that had the readahead marker. But because of the
alignment requirements, that folio (the first one in the readahead block)
can end up being order-0 in some cases.
There will be 2 modifications to solve this issue:
1) Calculate the readahead size so the end is aligned to a folio
boundary. This prevents needing to allocate small folios to align
down at the end of the window and fixes the oscillation problem.
2) Remember the "preferred folio order" in the ra state instead of
inferring it from the folio with the readahead marker. This solves
the slow ramp up problem (discussed in a subsequent patch).
This patch addresses (1) only. A subsequent patch will address (2).
Worked example:
The following shows the previous pathalogical behaviour when the initial
synchronous readahead is unaligned. We start reading at page 17 in the
file and read sequentially from there. I'm showing a dump of the pages in
the page cache just after we read the first page of the folio with the
readahead marker.
Initially there are no pages in the page cache:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00800000 8388608 0 2048 2048
Then we access page 17, causing synchonous read-around of 128K with a
readahead marker set up at page 25. So far, all as expected:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00001000 4096 0 1 1
FOLIO 0x00001000 0x00002000 4096 1 2 1 0
FOLIO 0x00002000 0x00003000 4096 2 3 1 0
FOLIO 0x00003000 0x00004000 4096 3 4 1 0
FOLIO 0x00004000 0x00005000 4096 4 5 1 0
FOLIO 0x00005000 0x00006000 4096 5 6 1 0
FOLIO 0x00006000 0x00007000 4096 6 7 1 0
FOLIO 0x00007000 0x00008000 4096 7 8 1 0
FOLIO 0x00008000 0x00009000 4096 8 9 1 0
FOLIO 0x00009000 0x0000a000 4096 9 10 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000a000 0x0000b000 4096 10 11 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000b000 0x0000c000 4096 11 12 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000c000 0x0000d000 4096 12 13 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000d000 0x0000e000 4096 13 14 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000e000 0x0000f000 4096 14 15 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000f000 0x00010000 4096 15 16 1 0
FOLIO 0x00010000 0x00011000 4096 16 17 1 0
FOLIO 0x00011000 0x00012000 4096 17 18 1 0
FOLIO 0x00012000 0x00013000 4096 18 19 1 0
FOLIO 0x00013000 0x00014000 4096 19 20 1 0
FOLIO 0x00014000 0x00015000 4096 20 21 1 0
FOLIO 0x00015000 0x00016000 4096 21 22 1 0
FOLIO 0x00016000 0x00017000 4096 22 23 1 0
FOLIO 0x00017000 0x00018000 4096 23 24 1 0
FOLIO 0x00018000 0x00019000 4096 24 25 1 0
FOLIO 0x00019000 0x0001a000 4096 25 26 1 0 Y
FOLIO 0x0001a000 0x0001b000 4096 26 27 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001b000 0x0001c000 4096 27 28 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001c000 0x0001d000 4096 28 29 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001d000 0x0001e000 4096 29 30 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001e000 0x0001f000 4096 30 31 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001f000 0x00020000 4096 31 32 1 0
FOLIO 0x00020000 0x00021000 4096 32 33 1 0
HOLE 0x00021000 0x00800000 8253440 33 2048 2015
Now access pages 18-25 inclusive. This causes an asynchronous 128K
readahead starting at page 33. But since we are unaligned, even though
the preferred folio order is 2, the first folio in this batch (the one
with the new readahead marker) is order-0:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00001000 4096 0 1 1
FOLIO 0x00001000 0x00002000 4096 1 2 1 0
FOLIO 0x00002000 0x00003000 4096 2 3 1 0
FOLIO 0x00003000 0x00004000 4096 3 4 1 0
FOLIO 0x00004000 0x00005000 4096 4 5 1 0
FOLIO 0x00005000 0x00006000 4096 5 6 1 0
FOLIO 0x00006000 0x00007000 4096 6 7 1 0
FOLIO 0x00007000 0x00008000 4096 7 8 1 0
FOLIO 0x00008000 0x00009000 4096 8 9 1 0
FOLIO 0x00009000 0x0000a000 4096 9 10 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000a000 0x0000b000 4096 10 11 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000b000 0x0000c000 4096 11 12 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000c000 0x0000d000 4096 12 13 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000d000 0x0000e000 4096 13 14 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000e000 0x0000f000 4096 14 15 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000f000 0x00010000 4096 15 16 1 0
FOLIO 0x00010000 0x00011000 4096 16 17 1 0
FOLIO 0x00011000 0x00012000 4096 17 18 1 0
FOLIO 0x00012000 0x00013000 4096 18 19 1 0
FOLIO 0x00013000 0x00014000 4096 19 20 1 0
FOLIO 0x00014000 0x00015000 4096 20 21 1 0
FOLIO 0x00015000 0x00016000 4096 21 22 1 0
FOLIO 0x00016000 0x00017000 4096 22 23 1 0
FOLIO 0x00017000 0x00018000 4096 23 24 1 0
FOLIO 0x00018000 0x00019000 4096 24 25 1 0
FOLIO 0x00019000 0x0001a000 4096 25 26 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001a000 0x0001b000 4096 26 27 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001b000 0x0001c000 4096 27 28 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001c000 0x0001d000 4096 28 29 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001d000 0x0001e000 4096 29 30 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001e000 0x0001f000 4096 30 31 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001f000 0x00020000 4096 31 32 1 0
FOLIO 0x00020000 0x00021000 4096 32 33 1 0
FOLIO 0x00021000 0x00022000 4096 33 34 1 0 Y
FOLIO 0x00022000 0x00024000 8192 34 36 2 1
FOLIO 0x00024000 0x00028000 16384 36 40 4 2
FOLIO 0x00028000 0x0002c000 16384 40 44 4 2
FOLIO 0x0002c000 0x00030000 16384 44 48 4 2
FOLIO 0x00030000 0x00034000 16384 48 52 4 2
FOLIO 0x00034000 0x00038000 16384 52 56 4 2
FOLIO 0x00038000 0x0003c000 16384 56 60 4 2
FOLIO 0x0003c000 0x00040000 16384 60 64 4 2
FOLIO 0x00040000 0x00041000 4096 64 65 1 0
HOLE 0x00041000 0x00800000 8122368 65 2048 1983
Which means that when we now read pages 26-33 and readahead is kicked off
again, the new preferred order is 2 (0 + 2), not 4 as we intended:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00001000 4096 0 1 1
FOLIO 0x00001000 0x00002000 4096 1 2 1 0
FOLIO 0x00002000 0x00003000 4096 2 3 1 0
FOLIO 0x00003000 0x00004000 4096 3 4 1 0
FOLIO 0x00004000 0x00005000 4096 4 5 1 0
FOLIO 0x00005000 0x00006000 4096 5 6 1 0
FOLIO 0x00006000 0x00007000 4096 6 7 1 0
FOLIO 0x00007000 0x00008000 4096 7 8 1 0
FOLIO 0x00008000 0x00009000 4096 8 9 1 0
FOLIO 0x00009000 0x0000a000 4096 9 10 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000a000 0x0000b000 4096 10 11 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000b000 0x0000c000 4096 11 12 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000c000 0x0000d000 4096 12 13 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000d000 0x0000e000 4096 13 14 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000e000 0x0000f000 4096 14 15 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000f000 0x00010000 4096 15 16 1 0
FOLIO 0x00010000 0x00011000 4096 16 17 1 0
FOLIO 0x00011000 0x00012000 4096 17 18 1 0
FOLIO 0x00012000 0x00013000 4096 18 19 1 0
FOLIO 0x00013000 0x00014000 4096 19 20 1 0
FOLIO 0x00014000 0x00015000 4096 20 21 1 0
FOLIO 0x00015000 0x00016000 4096 21 22 1 0
FOLIO 0x00016000 0x00017000 4096 22 23 1 0
FOLIO 0x00017000 0x00018000 4096 23 24 1 0
FOLIO 0x00018000 0x00019000 4096 24 25 1 0
FOLIO 0x00019000 0x0001a000 4096 25 26 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001a000 0x0001b000 4096 26 27 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001b000 0x0001c000 4096 27 28 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001c000 0x0001d000 4096 28 29 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001d000 0x0001e000 4096 29 30 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001e000 0x0001f000 4096 30 31 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001f000 0x00020000 4096 31 32 1 0
FOLIO 0x00020000 0x00021000 4096 32 33 1 0
FOLIO 0x00021000 0x00022000 4096 33 34 1 0
FOLIO 0x00022000 0x00024000 8192 34 36 2 1
FOLIO 0x00024000 0x00028000 16384 36 40 4 2
FOLIO 0x00028000 0x0002c000 16384 40 44 4 2
FOLIO 0x0002c000 0x00030000 16384 44 48 4 2
FOLIO 0x00030000 0x00034000 16384 48 52 4 2
FOLIO 0x00034000 0x00038000 16384 52 56 4 2
FOLIO 0x00038000 0x0003c000 16384 56 60 4 2
FOLIO 0x0003c000 0x00040000 16384 60 64 4 2
FOLIO 0x00040000 0x00041000 4096 64 65 1 0
FOLIO 0x00041000 0x00042000 4096 65 66 1 0 Y
FOLIO 0x00042000 0x00044000 8192 66 68 2 1
FOLIO 0x00044000 0x00048000 16384 68 72 4 2
FOLIO 0x00048000 0x0004c000 16384 72 76 4 2
FOLIO 0x0004c000 0x00050000 16384 76 80 4 2
FOLIO 0x00050000 0x00054000 16384 80 84 4 2
FOLIO 0x00054000 0x00058000 16384 84 88 4 2
FOLIO 0x00058000 0x0005c000 16384 88 92 4 2
FOLIO 0x0005c000 0x00060000 16384 92 96 4 2
FOLIO 0x00060000 0x00061000 4096 96 97 1 0
HOLE 0x00061000 0x00800000 7991296 97 2048 1951
This ramp up from order-0 with smaller orders at the edges for alignment
cycle continues all the way to the end of the file (not shown).
After the change, we round down the end boundary to the order boundary so
we no longer get stuck in the cycle and can ramp up the order over time.
Note that the rate of the ramp up is still not as we would expect it. We
will fix that next. Here we are touching pages 17-256 sequentially:
TYPE STARTOFFS ENDOFFS SIZE STARTPG ENDPG NRPG ORDER RA
----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- ------- ----- ----- --
HOLE 0x00000000 0x00001000 4096 0 1 1
FOLIO 0x00001000 0x00002000 4096 1 2 1 0
FOLIO 0x00002000 0x00003000 4096 2 3 1 0
FOLIO 0x00003000 0x00004000 4096 3 4 1 0
FOLIO 0x00004000 0x00005000 4096 4 5 1 0
FOLIO 0x00005000 0x00006000 4096 5 6 1 0
FOLIO 0x00006000 0x00007000 4096 6 7 1 0
FOLIO 0x00007000 0x00008000 4096 7 8 1 0
FOLIO 0x00008000 0x00009000 4096 8 9 1 0
FOLIO 0x00009000 0x0000a000 4096 9 10 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000a000 0x0000b000 4096 10 11 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000b000 0x0000c000 4096 11 12 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000c000 0x0000d000 4096 12 13 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000d000 0x0000e000 4096 13 14 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000e000 0x0000f000 4096 14 15 1 0
FOLIO 0x0000f000 0x00010000 4096 15 16 1 0
FOLIO 0x00010000 0x00011000 4096 16 17 1 0
FOLIO 0x00011000 0x00012000 4096 17 18 1 0
FOLIO 0x00012000 0x00013000 4096 18 19 1 0
FOLIO 0x00013000 0x00014000 4096 19 20 1 0
FOLIO 0x00014000 0x00015000 4096 20 21 1 0
FOLIO 0x00015000 0x00016000 4096 21 22 1 0
FOLIO 0x00016000 0x00017000 4096 22 23 1 0
FOLIO 0x00017000 0x00018000 4096 23 24 1 0
FOLIO 0x00018000 0x00019000 4096 24 25 1 0
FOLIO 0x00019000 0x0001a000 4096 25 26 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001a000 0x0001b000 4096 26 27 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001b000 0x0001c000 4096 27 28 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001c000 0x0001d000 4096 28 29 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001d000 0x0001e000 4096 29 30 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001e000 0x0001f000 4096 30 31 1 0
FOLIO 0x0001f000 0x00020000 4096 31 32 1 0
FOLIO 0x00020000 0x00021000 4096 32 33 1 0
FOLIO 0x00021000 0x00022000 4096 33 34 1 0
FOLIO 0x00022000 0x00024000 8192 34 36 2 1
FOLIO 0x00024000 0x00028000 16384 36 40 4 2
FOLIO 0x00028000 0x0002c000 16384 40 44 4 2
FOLIO 0x0002c000 0x00030000 16384 44 48 4 2
FOLIO 0x00030000 0x00034000 16384 48 52 4 2
FOLIO 0x00034000 0x00038000 16384 52 56 4 2
FOLIO 0x00038000 0x0003c000 16384 56 60 4 2
FOLIO 0x0003c000 0x00040000 16384 60 64 4 2
FOLIO 0x00040000 0x00044000 16384 64 68 4 2
FOLIO 0x00044000 0x00048000 16384 68 72 4 2
FOLIO 0x00048000 0x0004c000 16384 72 76 4 2
FOLIO 0x0004c000 0x00050000 16384 76 80 4 2
FOLIO 0x00050000 0x00054000 16384 80 84 4 2
FOLIO 0x00054000 0x00058000 16384 84 88 4 2
FOLIO 0x00058000 0x0005c000 16384 88 92 4 2
FOLIO 0x0005c000 0x00060000 16384 92 96 4 2
FOLIO 0x00060000 0x00070000 65536 96 112 16 4
FOLIO 0x00070000 0x00080000 65536 112 128 16 4
FOLIO 0x00080000 0x000a0000 131072 128 160 32 5
FOLIO 0x000a0000 0x000c0000 131072 160 192 32 5
FOLIO 0x000c0000 0x000e0000 131072 192 224 32 5
FOLIO 0x000e0000 0x00100000 131072 224 256 32 5
FOLIO 0x00100000 0x00120000 131072 256 288 32 5
FOLIO 0x00120000 0x00140000 131072 288 320 32 5 Y
HOLE 0x00140000 0x00800000 7077888 320 2048 1728
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250609092729.274960-3-ryan.roberts@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Chaitanya S Prakash <chaitanyas.prakash@arm.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-06-09 10:27:24 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-06-25 12:18:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2025-06-09 10:27:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2007-07-19 01:48:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 20:06:28 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2012-05-29 15:06:43 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2018-03-19 17:51:36 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2012-05-29 15:06:43 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2025-04-21 10:27:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-05-29 15:06:43 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2025-04-21 10:27:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-07-19 20:17:58 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2018-08-29 08:41:29 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-04-21 10:27:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-07-19 20:17:58 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2018-08-29 08:41:29 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2024-07-19 20:17:58 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2012-05-29 15:06:43 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2018-03-19 17:51:36 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2022-04-05 15:13:05 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-20 08:47:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-20 08:47:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-01-16 19:39:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-09-15 10:41:56 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2024-08-22 15:50:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-10 14:03:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
