mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
To: tj@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
Subject: [PATCH] blk-iocost: fix false positive lagging
Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 21:35:54 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220526133554.21079-1-zhouchengming@bytedance.com> (raw)

I found many false positive lagging during iocost test.

Since iocg->vtime will be advanced to (vnow - margins.target)
in hweight_after_donation(), which called throw away excess,
the iocg->done_vtime will also be advanced that much.

       period_at_vtime  <--period_vtime-->  vnow
              |                              |
  --------------------------------------------------->
        |<--->|
     margins.target
        |->
  vtime, done_vtime

If that iocg has some inflight io when vnow, but its done_vtime
is before period_at_vtime, ioc_timer_fn() will think it has
lagging io, even these io maybe issued just before now.

This patch change the condition to check if vdone is before
(period_at_vtime - margins.target) instead of period_at_vtime.

But there is another problem that this patch doesn't fix.
Since vtime will be advanced, we can't check if vtime is
after (vnow - MAX_LAGGING_PERIODS * period_vtime) to tell
whether this iocg pin lagging for too long.

Maybe we can add lagging_periods in iocg to record how many
periods this iocg pin lagging, but I don't know when to clean it.

Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
---
 block/blk-iocost.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-iocost.c b/block/blk-iocost.c
index 33a11ba971ea..42e301b7527b 100644
--- a/block/blk-iocost.c
+++ b/block/blk-iocost.c
@@ -2259,7 +2259,7 @@ static void ioc_timer_fn(struct timer_list *timer)
 		    time_after64(vtime, vdone) &&
 		    time_after64(vtime, now.vnow -
 				 MAX_LAGGING_PERIODS * period_vtime) &&
-		    time_before64(vdone, now.vnow - period_vtime))
+		    time_before64(vdone, ioc->period_at_vtime - ioc->margins.target))
 			nr_lagging++;
 
 		/*
-- 
2.36.1


             reply	other threads:[~2022-05-26 13:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-26 13:35 Chengming Zhou [this message]
2022-05-26 17:43 ` Tejun Heo
2022-05-26 23:43   ` [Phishing Risk] [External] " Chengming Zhou
2022-05-28  8:17 ` Chengming Zhou
2022-06-01 12:32   ` Chengming Zhou

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=20220526133554.21079-1-zhouchengming@bytedance.com \
    --to=zhouchengming@bytedance.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /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®