mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@ti.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-omap <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu
Subject: Re: mmc filesystem performance decreased on the first write after filesystem creation
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 11:51:41 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43d4164f-5dda-b49a-6008-1f5bf4b08547@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c6a47e30-f07d-3f79-2189-38b6f01429b9@intel.com>

On 30/05/18 11:44, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 28/05/18 09:26, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Summary: mke2s uses the BLKDISCARD ioctl to wipe the device,
>> and then uses BLKDISCARDZEROES to check if that zeroed the data.
>>
>> A while ago I made BLKDISCARDZEROES always return 0 because it is
>> basically impossible to have reliably zeroing using discard as the
>> standards leave the devices way to many options to not actually
>> zero data at their own choice when using the discard commands.
> 
> Older eMMC do not have a "discard" option and use "erase" instead.  "Erase"
> has similar benefits to "discard" but the eMMC is required to make the
> erased blocks read as either all 0's or all 1's.
> 
>>
>> So IFF mke2fs want to actually free space and zero it it needs
>> to use fallocate to punch a hole, and mmc needs to implement
>> REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROS IFF it actually has a reliable way to zero
>> blocks.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 08:48:31PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am debugging a performance reduction in ext2 filesystems on an mmc
>>> device in TI's am335x evm board.
>>>
>>> I see that the performance is reduced on the first write after making a
>>> new filesystem using mkfs.ext2 on one of the mmc partitions. The
>>> performance comes back to normal after the first write.
>>>
>>> commands used:
>>>
>>> => umount /dev/mmcblk1p2
>>>
>>> => mkfs.ext2 -F  /dev/mmcblk1p2
>>>
>>> => mount -t ext2 -o async /dev/mmcblk1p2 /mnt/partition_mmc
>>>
>>> => dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/shm/srctest_file_mmc_1184 bs=1M count=10
>>>
>>> => ./filesystem_tests -write -src_file /dev/shm/srctest_file_mmc_1184
>>> -srcfile_size 10 -file /mnt/partition_mmc/test_file_1184 -buffer_size
>>> 102400 -file_size 100 -performance
>>>
>>> The filesystem_tests write utility reads from the file generated at
>>> /dev/shm/srctest_file_mmc_1184, memory maps the file to a buffer, and
>>> then writes it into the newly created /mnt/partition_mmc in multiples of
>>> buffer_size while measuring write performance.
>>>
>>> See here for the implementation of filesystem_tests write utility:
>>> http://arago-project.org/git/projects/?p=test-automation/ltp-ddt.git;a=blob;f=testcases/ddt/filesystem_test_suite/src/testcases/st_filesystem_write_to_file.c;h=80e8e244d7eaa9f0dbd9b21ea705445156c36bef;hb=f7fc06c290333ce08a7d4fba104eee0f0f1d942b
>>>
>>> Complete log with multiple calls to filesystem_tests:
>>> https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/BckmTJpqPv/
>>>
>>> Notice that the first run of filesystem_tests has a lower throughput
>>> reported.
>>>
>>> I was able to bisect the issue to this commit:
>>> 5d1429fead5b (mmc: remove the discard_zeroes_data flag)
>>>
>>> I would assume that after this flag is removed, the filesystem creation
>>> command would explicitly write zeroes to the device which might explain
>>> the performance fall. However, then the mkfs.ext2 command itself should
>>> take more time rather than the first file write after that.
> 
> You might want to check the lazy initialization options.  I always use
> "-Elazy_itable_init=0,lazy_journal_init=0" with ext4 to prevent it messing
> up performance tests.

And discards are not enabled by default by mount so, at least on ext4,
adding "-o discard" is needed in the mount options.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-30  8:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-22 15:18 Faiz Abbas
2018-05-28  6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-30  8:44   ` Adrian Hunter
2018-05-30  8:51     ` Adrian Hunter [this message]
2018-05-30 16:15       ` Theodore Y. Ts'o

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=43d4164f-5dda-b49a-6008-1f5bf4b08547@intel.com \
    --to=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=faiz_abbas@ti.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.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®