From: Josh Snyder <joshs@netflix.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Josh Snyder <josh@code406.com>, Josh Snyder <joshs@netflix.com>
Subject: [RFC 1/2] Eliminate over- and under-counting of io_ticks
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 21:07:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200609040724.448519-2-joshs@netflix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200609040724.448519-1-joshs@netflix.com>
Previously, io_ticks could be under-counted. Consider these I/Os along
the time axis (in jiffies):
t 012345678
io1 |----|
io2 |---|
Under the old approach, io_ticks would count up to 6, like so:
t 012345678
io1 |----|
io2 |---|
stamp 0 45 8
io_ticks 1 23 6
With this change, io_ticks instead counts to 8, eliminating the
under-counting:
t 012345678
io1 |----|
io2 |---|
stamp 0 5 8
io_ticks 0 5 8
It was also possible for io_ticks to be over-counted. Consider a
workload that issues I/Os deterministically at intervals of 8ms (125Hz).
If each I/O takes 1ms, then the true utilization is 12.5%. The previous
implementation will increment io_ticks once for each jiffy in which an
I/O ends. Since the workload issues an I/O reliably for each jiffy, the
reported utilization will be 100%. This commit changes the approach such
that only I/Os which cross a boundary between jiffies are counted. With
this change, the given workload would count an I/O tick on every eighth
jiffy, resulting in a (correct) calculated utilization of 12.5%.
Signed-off-by: Josh Snyder <joshs@netflix.com>
Fixes: 5b18b5a73760 ("block: delete part_round_stats and switch to less precise counting")
---
block/blk-core.c | 20 +++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index d1b79dfe9540..a0bbd9e099b9 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -1396,14 +1396,22 @@ unsigned int blk_rq_err_bytes(const struct request *rq)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(blk_rq_err_bytes);
-static void update_io_ticks(struct hd_struct *part, unsigned long now, bool end)
+static void update_io_ticks(struct hd_struct *part, unsigned long now, unsigned long start)
{
unsigned long stamp;
+ unsigned long elapsed;
again:
stamp = READ_ONCE(part->stamp);
if (unlikely(stamp != now)) {
- if (likely(cmpxchg(&part->stamp, stamp, now) == stamp))
- __part_stat_add(part, io_ticks, end ? now - stamp : 1);
+ if (likely(cmpxchg(&part->stamp, stamp, now) == stamp)) {
+ // stamp denotes the last IO to finish
+ // If this IO started before stamp, then there was overlap between this IO
+ // and that one. We increment only by the non-overlap time.
+ // If not, there was no overlap and we increment by our own time,
+ // disregarding stamp.
+ elapsed = now - (start < stamp ? stamp : start);
+ __part_stat_add(part, io_ticks, elapsed);
+ }
}
if (part->partno) {
part = &part_to_disk(part)->part0;
@@ -1439,7 +1447,7 @@ void blk_account_io_done(struct request *req, u64 now)
part_stat_lock();
part = req->part;
- update_io_ticks(part, jiffies, true);
+ update_io_ticks(part, jiffies, nsecs_to_jiffies(req->start_time_ns));
part_stat_inc(part, ios[sgrp]);
part_stat_add(part, nsecs[sgrp], now - req->start_time_ns);
part_stat_unlock();
@@ -1456,7 +1464,6 @@ void blk_account_io_start(struct request *rq)
rq->part = disk_map_sector_rcu(rq->rq_disk, blk_rq_pos(rq));
part_stat_lock();
- update_io_ticks(rq->part, jiffies, false);
part_stat_unlock();
}
@@ -1468,7 +1475,6 @@ unsigned long disk_start_io_acct(struct gendisk *disk, unsigned int sectors,
unsigned long now = READ_ONCE(jiffies);
part_stat_lock();
- update_io_ticks(part, now, false);
part_stat_inc(part, ios[sgrp]);
part_stat_add(part, sectors[sgrp], sectors);
part_stat_local_inc(part, in_flight[op_is_write(op)]);
@@ -1487,7 +1493,7 @@ void disk_end_io_acct(struct gendisk *disk, unsigned int op,
unsigned long duration = now - start_time;
part_stat_lock();
- update_io_ticks(part, now, true);
+ update_io_ticks(part, now, start_time);
part_stat_add(part, nsecs[sgrp], jiffies_to_nsecs(duration));
part_stat_local_dec(part, in_flight[op_is_write(op)]);
part_stat_unlock();
--
2.25.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-09 4:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-09 4:07 [RFC 0/2] Increase accuracy and precision of sampled io_ticks Josh Snyder
2020-06-09 4:07 ` Josh Snyder [this message]
2020-06-09 8:08 ` [RFC 1/2] Eliminate over- and under-counting of io_ticks Ming Lei
2020-06-10 1:41 ` Hou Tao
2020-06-10 7:26 ` Josh Snyder
2020-06-09 4:07 ` [RFC 2/2] Track io_ticks at microsecond granularity Josh Snyder
2020-06-09 8:50 ` Ming Lei
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=20200609040724.448519-2-joshs@netflix.com \
--to=joshs@netflix.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=josh@code406.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.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
Powered by JetHome