From: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>, <axboe@kernel.dk>,
<andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>, <john.garry@huawei.com>,
<ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<yi.zhang@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next RFC v2 8/8] sbitmap: wake up the number of threads based on required tags
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2022 10:19:32 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <37ecdcd6-3130-fb92-295b-fbb23b53148f@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5d84c02f-62c6-6418-6629-cebd42dc2ca5@acm.org>
在 2022/04/08 22:31, Bart Van Assche 写道:
> On 4/8/22 00:39, Yu Kuai wrote:
>> Always wake up 'wake_batch' threads will intensify competition and
>> split io won't be issued continuously. Now that how many tags is required
>> is recorded for huge io, it's safe to wake up baed on required tags.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> lib/sbitmap.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/sbitmap.c b/lib/sbitmap.c
>> index 8d01e02ea4b1..eac9fa5c2b4d 100644
>> --- a/lib/sbitmap.c
>> +++ b/lib/sbitmap.c
>> @@ -614,6 +614,26 @@ static inline void sbq_update_preemption(struct
>> sbitmap_queue *sbq,
>> WRITE_ONCE(sbq->force_tag_preemption, force);
>> }
>> +static unsigned int get_wake_nr(struct sbq_wait_state *ws, unsigned
>> int nr_tags)
>
> Consider renaming "get_wake_nr()" into "nr_to_wake_up()".
>
>> +{
>> + struct sbq_wait *wait;
>> + struct wait_queue_entry *entry;
>> + unsigned int nr = 1;
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irq(&ws->wait.lock);
>> + list_for_each_entry(entry, &ws->wait.head, entry) {
>> + wait = container_of(entry, struct sbq_wait, wait);
>> + if (nr_tags <= wait->nr_tags)
>> + break;
>> +
>> + nr++;
>> + nr_tags -= wait->nr_tags;
>> + }
>> + spin_unlock_irq(&ws->wait.lock);
>> +
>> + return nr;
>> +}
>> +
>> static bool __sbq_wake_up(struct sbitmap_queue *sbq)
>> {
>> struct sbq_wait_state *ws;
>> @@ -648,7 +668,7 @@ static bool __sbq_wake_up(struct sbitmap_queue *sbq)
>> smp_mb__before_atomic();
>> atomic_set(&ws->wait_cnt, wake_batch);
>> sbq_update_preemption(sbq, wake_batch);
>> - wake_up_nr(&ws->wait, wake_batch);
>> + wake_up_nr(&ws->wait, get_wake_nr(ws, wake_batch));
>> return true;
>> }
>
> ws->wait.lock is unlocked after the number of threads to wake up has
> been computed and is locked again by wake_up_nr(). The ws->wait.head
> list may be modified after get_wake_nr() returns and before wake_up_nr()
> is called. Isn't that a race condition?
Hi,
That is a race condition, I was hoping that the problem patch 5 fixed
can cover this.
Thanks,
Kuai
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
> .
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-09 2:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-08 7:39 [PATCH -next RFC v2 0/8] improve tag allocation under heavy load Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 1/8] sbitmap: record the number of waiters for each waitqueue Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 2/8] blk-mq: call 'bt_wait_ptr()' later in blk_mq_get_tag() Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 14:20 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09 2:09 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-08 7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 3/8] sbitmap: make sure waitqueues are balanced Yu Kuai
2022-04-15 6:31 ` Li, Ming
2022-04-15 7:07 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-08 7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 4/8] blk-mq: don't preempt tag under heavy load Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 14:24 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09 2:38 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-08 7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 5/8] sbitmap: force tag preemption if free tags are sufficient Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 6/8] blk-mq: force tag preemption for split bios Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 7/8] blk-mq: record how many tags are needed for splited bio Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 7:39 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 8/8] sbitmap: wake up the number of threads based on required tags Yu Kuai
2022-04-08 14:31 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09 2:19 ` yukuai (C) [this message]
2022-04-08 21:13 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09 2:17 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-09 4:16 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-09 7:01 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-12 3:20 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-08 19:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v2 0/8] improve tag allocation under heavy load Jens Axboe
2022-04-09 2:26 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-09 2:28 ` Jens Axboe
2022-04-09 2:34 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-09 7:14 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-09 21:31 ` Bart Van Assche
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=37ecdcd6-3130-fb92-295b-fbb23b53148f@huawei.com \
--to=yukuai3@huawei.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@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®