From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
To: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <yi.zhang@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v10 3/4] block, bfq: refactor the counting of 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs'
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2022 16:10:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cacc6eee-9b7b-00d2-d573-a303b3bb57b8@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48edcfc1-030d-f78e-ee88-2a9a8cc467ac@huawei.com>
在 2022/06/24 9:26, Yu Kuai 写道:
> 在 2022/06/23 23:32, Paolo Valente 写道:
>> Sorry for the delay.
>>
>>> Il giorno 10 giu 2022, alle ore 04:17, Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
>>> ha scritto:
>>>
>>> Currently, bfq can't handle sync io concurrently as long as they
>>> are not issued from root group. This is because
>>> 'bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs > 0' is always true in
>>> bfq_asymmetric_scenario().
>>>
>>> The way that bfqg is counted into 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs':
>>>
>>> Before this patch:
>>> 1) root group will never be counted.
>>> 2) Count if bfqg or it's child bfqgs have pending requests.
>>> 3) Don't count if bfqg and it's child bfqgs complete all the requests.
>>>
>>> After this patch:
>>> 1) root group is counted.
>>> 2) Count if bfqg have pending requests.
>>> 3) Don't count if bfqg complete all the requests.
>>>
>>> With this change, the occasion that only one group is activated can be
>>> detected, and next patch will support concurrent sync io in the
>>> occasion.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
>>> ---
>>> block/bfq-iosched.c | 42 ------------------------------------------
>>> block/bfq-iosched.h | 18 +++++++++---------
>>> block/bfq-wf2q.c | 19 ++++---------------
>>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
>>> index 0ec21018daba..03b04892440c 100644
>>> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
>>> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
>>> @@ -970,48 +970,6 @@ void __bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data
>>> *bfqd,
>>> void bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
>>> struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
>>> {
>>> - struct bfq_entity *entity = bfqq->entity.parent;
>>> -
>>> - for_each_entity(entity) {
>>> - struct bfq_sched_data *sd = entity->my_sched_data;
>>> -
>>> - if (sd->next_in_service || sd->in_service_entity) {
>>> - /*
>>> - * entity is still active, because either
>>> - * next_in_service or in_service_entity is not
>>> - * NULL (see the comments on the definition of
>>> - * next_in_service for details on why
>>> - * in_service_entity must be checked too).
>>> - *
>>> - * As a consequence, its parent entities are
>>> - * active as well, and thus this loop must
>>> - * stop here.
>>> - */
>>> - break;
>>> - }
>>> -
>>> - /*
>>> - * The decrement of num_groups_with_pending_reqs is
>>> - * not performed immediately upon the deactivation of
>>> - * entity, but it is delayed to when it also happens
>>> - * that the first leaf descendant bfqq of entity gets
>>> - * all its pending requests completed. The following
>>> - * instructions perform this delayed decrement, if
>>> - * needed. See the comments on
>>> - * num_groups_with_pending_reqs for details.
>>> - */
>>> - if (entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
>>> - entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = false;
>>> - bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs--;
>>> - }
>>> - }
>>
>> With this part removed, I'm missing how you handle the following
>> sequence of events:
>> 1. a queue Q becomes non busy but still has dispatched requests, so
>> it must not be removed from the counter of queues with pending reqs
>> yet
>> 2. the last request of Q is completed with Q being still idle (non
>> busy). At this point Q must be removed from the counter. It seems to
>> me that this case is not handled any longer
>>
> Hi, Paolo
>
> 1) At first, patch 1 support to track if bfqq has pending requests, it's
> done by setting the flag 'entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs' when the
> first request is inserted to bfqq, and it's cleared when the last
> request is completed.
>
> 2) Then, patch 2 add a counter in bfqg: how many bfqqs have pending
> requests, which is updated while tracking if bfqq has pending requests.
>
> 3) Finally, patch 3 tracks 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs' based on the
> new counter in patch 2:
> - if the counter(how many bfqqs have pending requests) increased from 0
> to 0, increase 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs'.
Hi, Paolo
Sorry that I made a mistake here:
increased from 0 to 0 -> increased from 0 to 1.
look forward to your reply
Kuai
> - if the counter is decreased from 1 to 0, decrease
> 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs'
>
>> Additional comment: if your changes do not cpus the problem above,
>> then this function only invokes __bfq_weights_tree_remove. So what's
>> the point in keeping this function)
>
> If this patchset is applied, there are following cleanup patches to
> remove this function.
>
> multiple cleanup patches for bfq:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220528095958.270455-1-yukuai3@huawei.com/
>>
>>> -
>>> - /*
>>> - * Next function is invoked last, because it causes bfqq to be
>>> - * freed if the following holds: bfqq is not in service and
>>> - * has no dispatched request. DO NOT use bfqq after the next
>>> - * function invocation.
>>> - */
>>
>> I would really love it if you leave this comment. I added it after
>> suffering a lot for a nasty UAF. Of course the first sentence may
>> need to be adjusted if the code that precedes it is to be removed.
>>
>
> Same as above, if this patch is applied, this function will be gone.
>
> Thanks,
> Kuai
>> Thanks,
>> Paolo
>>
>>
>>> __bfq_weights_tree_remove(bfqd, bfqq,
>>> &bfqd->queue_weights_tree);
>>> }
>>> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.h b/block/bfq-iosched.h
>>> index de2446a9b7ab..f0fce94583e4 100644
>>> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.h
>>> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.h
>>> @@ -496,27 +496,27 @@ struct bfq_data {
>>> struct rb_root_cached queue_weights_tree;
>>>
>>> /*
>>> - * Number of groups with at least one descendant process that
>>> + * Number of groups with at least one process that
>>> * has at least one request waiting for completion. Note that
>>> * this accounts for also requests already dispatched, but not
>>> * yet completed. Therefore this number of groups may differ
>>> * (be larger) than the number of active groups, as a group is
>>> * considered active only if its corresponding entity has
>>> - * descendant queues with at least one request queued. This
>>> + * queues with at least one request queued. This
>>> * number is used to decide whether a scenario is symmetric.
>>> * For a detailed explanation see comments on the computation
>>> * of the variable asymmetric_scenario in the function
>>> * bfq_better_to_idle().
>>> *
>>> * However, it is hard to compute this number exactly, for
>>> - * groups with multiple descendant processes. Consider a group
>>> - * that is inactive, i.e., that has no descendant process with
>>> + * groups with multiple processes. Consider a group
>>> + * that is inactive, i.e., that has no process with
>>> * pending I/O inside BFQ queues. Then suppose that
>>> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs is still accounting for this
>>> - * group, because the group has descendant processes with some
>>> + * group, because the group has processes with some
>>> * I/O request still in flight. num_groups_with_pending_reqs
>>> * should be decremented when the in-flight request of the
>>> - * last descendant process is finally completed (assuming that
>>> + * last process is finally completed (assuming that
>>> * nothing else has changed for the group in the meantime, in
>>> * terms of composition of the group and active/inactive state of
>>> child
>>> * groups and processes). To accomplish this, an additional
>>> @@ -525,7 +525,7 @@ struct bfq_data {
>>> * we resort to the following tradeoff between simplicity and
>>> * accuracy: for an inactive group that is still counted in
>>> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs, we decrement
>>> - * num_groups_with_pending_reqs when the first descendant
>>> + * num_groups_with_pending_reqs when the first
>>> * process of the group remains with no request waiting for
>>> * completion.
>>> *
>>> @@ -533,12 +533,12 @@ struct bfq_data {
>>> * carefulness: to avoid multiple decrements, we flag a group,
>>> * more precisely an entity representing a group, as still
>>> * counted in num_groups_with_pending_reqs when it becomes
>>> - * inactive. Then, when the first descendant queue of the
>>> + * inactive. Then, when the first queue of the
>>> * entity remains with no request waiting for completion,
>>> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs is decremented, and this flag
>>> * is reset. After this flag is reset for the entity,
>>> * num_groups_with_pending_reqs won't be decremented any
>>> - * longer in case a new descendant queue of the entity remains
>>> + * longer in case a new queue of the entity remains
>>> * with no request waiting for completion.
>>> */
>>> unsigned int num_groups_with_pending_reqs;
>>> diff --git a/block/bfq-wf2q.c b/block/bfq-wf2q.c
>>> index 6f36f3fe5cc8..9c2842bedf97 100644
>>> --- a/block/bfq-wf2q.c
>>> +++ b/block/bfq-wf2q.c
>>> @@ -984,19 +984,6 @@ static void __bfq_activate_entity(struct
>>> bfq_entity *entity,
>>> entity->on_st_or_in_serv = true;
>>> }
>>>
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED
>>> - if (!bfq_entity_to_bfqq(entity)) { /* bfq_group */
>>> - struct bfq_group *bfqg =
>>> - container_of(entity, struct bfq_group, entity);
>>> - struct bfq_data *bfqd = bfqg->bfqd;
>>> -
>>> - if (!entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
>>> - entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = true;
>>> - bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs++;
>>> - }
>>> - }
>>> -#endif
>>> -
>>> bfq_update_fin_time_enqueue(entity, st, backshifted);
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -1654,7 +1641,8 @@ void
>>> bfq_add_bfqq_in_groups_with_pending_reqs(struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
>>> if (!entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
>>> entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = true;
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED
>>> - bfqq_group(bfqq)->num_queues_with_pending_reqs++;
>>> + if (!(bfqq_group(bfqq)->num_queues_with_pending_reqs++))
>>> + bfqq->bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs++;
>>> #endif
>>> }
>>> }
>>> @@ -1666,7 +1654,8 @@ void
>>> bfq_del_bfqq_in_groups_with_pending_reqs(struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
>>> if (entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs) {
>>> entity->in_groups_with_pending_reqs = false;
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED
>>> - bfqq_group(bfqq)->num_queues_with_pending_reqs--;
>>> + if (!(--bfqq_group(bfqq)->num_queues_with_pending_reqs))
>>> + bfqq->bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs--;
>>> #endif
>>> }
>>> }
>>> --
>>> 2.31.1
>>>
>>
>> .
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-25 8:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-10 2:16 [PATCH -next v10 0/4] support concurrent sync io for bfq on a specail occasion Yu Kuai
2022-06-10 2:16 ` [PATCH -next v10 1/4] block, bfq: support to track if bfqq has pending requests Yu Kuai
2022-06-10 2:16 ` [PATCH -next v10 2/4] block, bfq: record how many queues have " Yu Kuai
2022-06-10 2:17 ` [PATCH -next v10 3/4] block, bfq: refactor the counting of 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs' Yu Kuai
2022-06-23 15:32 ` Paolo Valente
2022-06-24 1:26 ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-25 8:10 ` Yu Kuai [this message]
2022-07-12 13:30 ` Yu Kuai
[not found] ` <C2CF100A-9A7C-4300-9A70-1295BC939C66@unimore.it>
2022-07-20 11:38 ` Yu Kuai
2022-07-27 12:11 ` Yu Kuai
2022-08-05 11:20 ` Yu Kuai
2022-08-10 10:49 ` Paolo Valente
2022-08-11 1:19 ` Yu Kuai
2022-08-25 12:14 ` Yu Kuai
[not found] ` <D89DCF20-27D8-4F8F-B8B0-FD193FC4F18D@unimore.it>
2022-08-26 2:34 ` Yu Kuai
2022-09-06 9:37 ` Paolo Valente
2022-09-07 1:16 ` Yu Kuai
2022-09-14 1:55 ` Yu Kuai
2022-09-14 7:50 ` Paolo VALENTE
2022-09-14 8:15 ` Yu Kuai
2022-09-14 9:00 ` Jan Kara
2022-09-15 1:18 ` Yu Kuai
2022-06-10 2:17 ` [PATCH -next v10 4/4] block, bfq: do not idle if only one group is activated Yu Kuai
2022-06-17 1:12 ` [PATCH -next v10 0/4] support concurrent sync io for bfq on a specail occasion Yu Kuai
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=cacc6eee-9b7b-00d2-d573-a303b3bb57b8@huawei.com \
--to=yukuai3@huawei.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--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®