mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Cc: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>,
	linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: issue small discard by LBA order
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2018 18:10:59 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180707011059.GC3767@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <822c2d6b-1765-7956-2a30-09d0423e90a2@kernel.org>

On 07/07, Chao Yu wrote:
> Hi Jaegeuk,
> 
> On 2018/7/7 7:23, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 07/05, Chao Yu wrote:
> >> For small granularity discard which size is smaller than 64KB, if we
> >> issue those kind of discards orderly by size, their IOs will be spread
> >> into entire logical address, so that in FTL, L2P table will be updated
> >> randomly, result bad wear rate in the table.
> >>
> >> In this patch, we choose to issue small discard by LBA order, by this
> >> way, we can expect that L2P table updates from adjacent discard IOs can
> >> be merged in the cache, so it can reduce lifetime wearing of flash.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
> >> ---
> >>  fs/f2fs/f2fs.h    |  2 ++
> >>  fs/f2fs/segment.c | 71 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  2 files changed, 73 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> >> index 47ac0a9b022f..8d592029328a 100644
> >> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> >> @@ -290,6 +290,7 @@ struct discard_policy {
> >>  	unsigned int io_aware_gran;	/* minimum granularity discard not be aware of I/O */
> >>  	bool io_aware;			/* issue discard in idle time */
> >>  	bool sync;			/* submit discard with REQ_SYNC flag */
> >> +	bool ordered;			/* issue discard by lba order */
> >>  	unsigned int granularity;	/* discard granularity */
> >>  };
> >>  
> >> @@ -306,6 +307,7 @@ struct discard_cmd_control {
> >>  	unsigned int max_discards;		/* max. discards to be issued */
> >>  	unsigned int discard_granularity;	/* discard granularity */
> >>  	unsigned int undiscard_blks;		/* # of undiscard blocks */
> >> +	unsigned int next_pos;			/* next discard position */
> >>  	atomic_t issued_discard;		/* # of issued discard */
> >>  	atomic_t issing_discard;		/* # of issing discard */
> >>  	atomic_t discard_cmd_cnt;		/* # of cached cmd count */
> >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> >> index f95bf618bc1e..df0d91dfb8ac 100644
> >> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> >> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
> >>  #include <linux/timer.h>
> >>  #include <linux/freezer.h>
> >>  #include <linux/sched/signal.h>
> >> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> > 
> > Why?
> 
> I forgot to remove this... will do it.
> 
> > 
> >>  
> >>  #include "f2fs.h"
> >>  #include "segment.h"
> >> @@ -936,6 +937,7 @@ static void __init_discard_policy(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> >>  	/* common policy */
> >>  	dpolicy->type = discard_type;
> >>  	dpolicy->sync = true;
> >> +	dpolicy->ordered = false;
> >>  	dpolicy->granularity = granularity;
> >>  
> >>  	dpolicy->max_requests = DEF_MAX_DISCARD_REQUEST;
> >> @@ -947,6 +949,7 @@ static void __init_discard_policy(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> >>  		dpolicy->max_interval = DEF_MAX_DISCARD_ISSUE_TIME;
> >>  		dpolicy->io_aware = true;
> >>  		dpolicy->sync = false;
> >> +		dpolicy->ordered = true;
> >>  		if (utilization(sbi) > DEF_DISCARD_URGENT_UTIL) {
> >>  			dpolicy->granularity = 1;
> >>  			dpolicy->max_interval = DEF_MIN_DISCARD_ISSUE_TIME;
> >> @@ -1202,6 +1205,69 @@ static int __queue_discard_cmd(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> >>  	return 0;
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> +static unsigned int __issue_discard_cmd_orderly(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> >> +					struct discard_policy *dpolicy)
> >> +{
> >> +	struct discard_cmd_control *dcc = SM_I(sbi)->dcc_info;
> >> +	struct discard_cmd *prev_dc = NULL, *next_dc = NULL;
> >> +	struct rb_node **insert_p = NULL, *insert_parent = NULL;
> >> +	struct discard_cmd *dc;
> >> +	struct blk_plug plug;
> >> +	unsigned int pos = dcc->next_pos;
> >> +	unsigned int issued = 0, iter = 0;
> >> +	bool io_interrupted;
> >> +
> >> +	mutex_lock(&dcc->cmd_lock);
> >> +	dc = (struct discard_cmd *)f2fs_lookup_rb_tree_ret(&dcc->root,
> >> +					NULL, pos,
> >> +					(struct rb_entry **)&prev_dc,
> >> +					(struct rb_entry **)&next_dc,
> >> +					&insert_p, &insert_parent, true);
> >> +	if (!dc)
> >> +		dc = next_dc;
> >> +
> >> +	blk_start_plug(&plug);
> >> +
> >> +	while (dc) {
> >> +		struct rb_node *node;
> >> +
> >> +		if (dc->state != D_PREP)
> >> +			goto next;
> >> +retry:
> >> +		io_interrupted = false;
> >> +
> >> +		if (dpolicy->io_aware && !is_idle(sbi)) {
> >> +			io_interrupted = true;
> >> +			goto skip;
> > 
> > Please don't try, if user is doing something.
> 
> Just use 'break' instead of 'goto skip' here?

Yes, likewise as is.

> 
> > 
> >> +		}
> >> +
> >> +		__submit_discard_cmd(sbi, dpolicy, dc);
> >> +		issued++;
> >> +		dcc->next_pos = dc->lstart + dc->len;
> >> +skip:
> >> +		if (++iter >= dpolicy->max_requests)
> >> +			break;
> >> +
> >> +		if (io_interrupted)
> >> +			goto retry;
> >> +next:
> >> +		node = rb_next(&dc->rb_node);
> >> +		dc = rb_entry_safe(node, struct discard_cmd, rb_node);
> >> +	}
> >> +
> >> +	blk_finish_plug(&plug);
> >> +
> >> +	if (!dc)
> >> +		dcc->next_pos = 0;
> >> +
> >> +	mutex_unlock(&dcc->cmd_lock);
> >> +
> >> +	if (!issued && io_interrupted)
> >> +		issued = -1;
> >> +
> >> +	return issued;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >>  static int __issue_discard_cmd(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> >>  					struct discard_policy *dpolicy)
> >>  {
> >> @@ -1215,6 +1281,10 @@ static int __issue_discard_cmd(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> >>  	for (i = MAX_PLIST_NUM - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
> >>  		if (i + 1 < dpolicy->granularity)
> >>  			break;
> >> +
> >> +		if (i < DEFAULT_DISCARD_GRANULARITY && dpolicy->ordered)
> >> +			return __issue_discard_cmd_orderly(sbi, dpolicy);
> > 
> > So, at this moment, we usually expect there'd be a bunch of small candidates
> > only, and thus, it'd be better to issue small chunks in LBA order?
> 
> Yes, that's right. :)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > 
> >> +
> >>  		pend_list = &dcc->pend_list[i];
> >>  
> >>  		mutex_lock(&dcc->cmd_lock);
> >> @@ -1786,6 +1856,7 @@ static int create_discard_cmd_control(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
> >>  	dcc->nr_discards = 0;
> >>  	dcc->max_discards = MAIN_SEGS(sbi) << sbi->log_blocks_per_seg;
> >>  	dcc->undiscard_blks = 0;
> >> +	dcc->next_pos = 0;
> >>  	dcc->root = RB_ROOT;
> >>  	dcc->rbtree_check = false;
> >>  
> >> -- 
> >> 2.18.0.rc1

      reply	other threads:[~2018-07-07  1:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-05 11:37 [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: fix to detect looped node chain correctly Chao Yu
2018-07-05 11:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: issue small discard by LBA order Chao Yu
2018-07-06 23:23   ` Jaegeuk Kim
2018-07-07  0:08     ` Chao Yu
2018-07-07  1:10       ` Jaegeuk Kim [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180707011059.GC3767@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com \
    --to=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
    --cc=chao@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yuchao0@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®