Shaohua Li
2011-Jan-04 05:40 UTC
[PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
Hi, We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead for btrfs. In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore syscall. Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are welcome! v1->v2: 1. Added more comments and fix return values suggested by Andrew Morton 2. fix a race condition pointed out by Yan Zheng initial post: http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129222493406353&w=2 Thanks, Shaohua -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Jeff Moyer
2011-Jan-04 16:14 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> writes:> Hi, > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > for btrfs. > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore > syscall. > Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead > reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. > Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the > new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we > have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some > code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are > welcome!Is it not possible to enhance the existing readahead mechanisms to work on metadata as well? Is there some reason why metadata should be fetched separately from the data it references? Cheers, Jeff
Shaohua Li
2011-Jan-05 02:10 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 00:14 +0800, Jeff Moyer wrote:> Shaohua Li <shaohua.li-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> writes: > > > Hi, > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > for btrfs. > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore > > syscall. > > Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead > > reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. > > Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the > > new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we > > have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some > > code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are > > welcome! > > Is it not possible to enhance the existing readahead mechanisms to work > on metadata as well?using existing sys_readahead to do metadata readahead? The problem is I can''t hook a fd for meatadata inode, as explained above. or let kernel automatically do metadata readahead? Kernel can''t be so intelligent, because kernel doesn''t even know which file should be readahead till userspace tells it> Is there some reason why metadata should be > fetched separately from the data it references?metadata read is sync operation, which will break data readahead pipeline. And metadata and data usually lives in not adjacent disk blocks, which will introduce a lot of disk seeks. reading metadata first and then do data readahead can reduce a lot of disk seeks and data readahead can be fully pumped Thanks, Shaohua
Wu Fengguang
2011-Jan-10 14:26 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
Shaohua, On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:> Hi, > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > for btrfs. > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls forIf that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead. Thanks, Fengguang> this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore > syscall. > Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead > reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. > Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the > new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we > have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some > code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are > welcome! > > v1->v2: > 1. Added more comments and fix return values suggested by Andrew Morton > 2. fix a race condition pointed out by Yan Zheng > > initial post: > http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129222493406353&w=2 > > Thanks, > Shaohua > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Shaohua Li
2011-Jan-11 00:15 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:> Shaohua, > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > Hi, > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > for btrfs. > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > If that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ > fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden > btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and > have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know > ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead.I forgot to update this comment. Please see patch 2 and patch 4, both incore and readahead need btrfs specific staff involved, so we can''t use generic fincore or something. Thanks, Shaohua> > this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore > > syscall. > > Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead > > reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. > > Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the > > new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we > > have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some > > code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are > > welcome! > > > > v1->v2: > > 1. Added more comments and fix return values suggested by Andrew Morton > > 2. fix a race condition pointed out by Yan Zheng > > > > initial post: > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129222493406353&w=2 > > > > Thanks, > > Shaohua > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Wu Fengguang
2011-Jan-11 01:38 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:15:19AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:> On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > Shaohua, > > > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > Hi, > > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > > for btrfs. > > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > > > If that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ > > fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden > > btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and > > have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know > > ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead. > I forgot to update this comment. Please see patch 2 and patch 4, both > incore and readahead need btrfs specific staff involved, so we can''t use > generic fincore or something.You can if you like :) - fincore() can return the referenced bit, which is generally useful information - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) ->readpages() for use with fadvise. Thanks, Fengguang> > > this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore > > > syscall. > > > Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead > > > reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. > > > Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the > > > new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we > > > have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some > > > code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are > > > welcome! > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > 1. Added more comments and fix return values suggested by Andrew Morton > > > 2. fix a race condition pointed out by Yan Zheng > > > > > > initial post: > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129222493406353&w=2 > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Shaohua > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > > > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > >
Shaohua Li
2011-Jan-11 02:03 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 09:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:15:19AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > Shaohua, > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > > > for btrfs. > > > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > > > > > If that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ > > > fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden > > > btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and > > > have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know > > > ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead. > > I forgot to update this comment. Please see patch 2 and patch 4, both > > incore and readahead need btrfs specific staff involved, so we can''t use > > generic fincore or something. > > You can if you like :) > > - fincore() can return the referenced bit, which is generally > useful informationmetadata page in ext2/3 doesn''t have reference bit set, while btrfs has. we can''t blindly filter out such pages with the bit. fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be transparent to userspace.> - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) > ->readpages() for use with fadvise.this need filesystem specific hook too, the difference is your proposal uses fadvise but I''m using ioctl. There isn''t big difference. BTW, it''s hard to hook btrfs_inode to a fd even with a ioctl, at least I didn''t find a easy way to do this. It might be possible to do this for example adding a fake device or fake fs (anon_inode doesn''t work here, IIRC), which is a bit ugly. Before it''s proved generic API can handle metadata readahead, I don''t want to do it. Thanks, Shaohua> > > > this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore > > > > syscall. > > > > Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead > > > > reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. > > > > Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the > > > > new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we > > > > have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some > > > > code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are > > > > welcome! > > > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > > 1. Added more comments and fix return values suggested by Andrew Morton > > > > 2. fix a race condition pointed out by Yan Zheng > > > > > > > > initial post: > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129222493406353&w=2 > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Shaohua > > > > > > > > -- > > > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > > > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > >-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Wu Fengguang
2011-Jan-11 03:07 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:> On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 09:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:15:19AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > Shaohua, > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > > > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > > > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > > > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > > > > for btrfs. > > > > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > > > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > > > > > > > If that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ > > > > fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden > > > > btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and > > > > have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know > > > > ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead. > > > I forgot to update this comment. Please see patch 2 and patch 4, both > > > incore and readahead need btrfs specific staff involved, so we can''t use > > > generic fincore or something. > > > > You can if you like :) > > > > - fincore() can return the referenced bit, which is generally > > useful information > metadata page in ext2/3 doesn''t have reference bit set, while btrfs has. > we can''t blindly filter out such pages with the bit.block_dev inodes have the accessed bits. Look at the below output. /dev/sda5 is a mounted ext4 partition. The ''A''/''R'' in the dump_page_cache lines stand for Active/Referenced. root@bay /home/wfg# echo /dev/sda5 > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file root@bay /home/wfg# cat /debug/tracing/trace # tracer: nop # # TASK-PID CPU# TIMESTAMP FUNCTION # | | | | | zsh-2950 [003] 879.500764: dump_inode_cache: 0 55643986944 1703936 21879 D___ BLK mount /dev/sda5 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500774: dump_page_cache: 0 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500776: dump_page_cache: 2 3 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500777: dump_page_cache: 1026 5 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500778: dump_page_cache: 1031 3 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500779: dump_page_cache: 1034 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500780: dump_page_cache: 1035 2 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500781: dump_page_cache: 1037 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500782: dump_page_cache: 1038 3 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500782: dump_page_cache: 1041 1 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500783: dump_page_cache: 1057 1 ___AR_D___P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500788: dump_page_cache: 1058 6 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500788: dump_page_cache: 9249 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500789: dump_page_cache: 524289 1 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500790: dump_page_cache: 524290 2 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500790: dump_page_cache: 524292 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500791: dump_page_cache: 524293 1 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500796: dump_page_cache: 524294 9 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500797: dump_page_cache: 524303 1 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500798: dump_page_cache: 987136 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500798: dump_page_cache: 1048576 1 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500799: dump_page_cache: 1048577 2 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500800: dump_page_cache: 1048579 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500801: dump_page_cache: 1048580 5 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500802: dump_page_cache: 1048585 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500805: dump_page_cache: 1048586 5 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500805: dump_page_cache: 1048591 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500806: dump_page_cache: 1572864 1 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500807: dump_page_cache: 1572865 5 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500808: dump_page_cache: 1572870 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500811: dump_page_cache: 1572871 6 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500812: dump_page_cache: 1572877 3 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500816: dump_page_cache: 2097153 8 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500817: dump_page_cache: 2097161 1 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500818: dump_page_cache: 2097162 4 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500819: dump_page_cache: 6324224 1 ____R_D___P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500820: dump_page_cache: 6324225 3 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500825: dump_page_cache: 6324228 29 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500826: dump_page_cache: 6324257 1 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500828: dump_page_cache: 6324258 4 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500830: dump_page_cache: 6324262 11 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500833: dump_page_cache: 6324273 16 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500833: dump_page_cache: 6324289 1 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500834: dump_page_cache: 6324290 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500835: dump_page_cache: 6324292 8 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500836: dump_page_cache: 6324300 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500837: dump_page_cache: 6324302 3 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500838: dump_page_cache: 6324305 4 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500843: dump_page_cache: 6324309 28 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500844: dump_page_cache: 6324337 4 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500845: dump_page_cache: 6324341 2 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500850: dump_page_cache: 6324343 30 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500851: dump_page_cache: 6324373 2 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500852: dump_page_cache: 6324375 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500853: dump_page_cache: 6324377 9 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500854: dump_page_cache: 6324386 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500855: dump_page_cache: 6324388 5 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500856: dump_page_cache: 6324393 3 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500858: dump_page_cache: 6324396 11 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500859: dump_page_cache: 6324407 1 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500864: dump_page_cache: 6324408 31 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500864: dump_page_cache: 6324439 1 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500865: dump_page_cache: 6324440 1 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500866: dump_page_cache: 6324441 2 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500867: dump_page_cache: 6324443 5 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500872: dump_page_cache: 6324448 26 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500873: dump_page_cache: 6324474 6 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500874: dump_page_cache: 6324480 4 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500879: dump_page_cache: 6324484 28 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500880: dump_page_cache: 6324512 4 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500881: dump_page_cache: 6324516 1 ____R_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500881: dump_page_cache: 6324517 1 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500882: dump_page_cache: 6324518 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500888: dump_page_cache: 6324520 28 ___A______P 2 0 zsh-2950 [003] 879.500890: dump_page_cache: 6324548 2 ____R_____P 2 0> fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > transparent to userspace.Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped (anonymous) pages. Another option may be to use the above /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file interface.> > - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) > > ->readpages() for use with fadvise. > this need filesystem specific hook too, the difference is your proposal > uses fadvise but I''m using ioctl. There isn''t big difference.True for btrfs. However they make big differences for other file systems.> BTW, it''s hard to hook btrfs_inode to a fd even with a ioctl, at least I > didn''t find a easy way to do this. It might be possible to do this for > example adding a fake device or fake fs (anon_inode doesn''t work here, > IIRC), which is a bit ugly. Before it''s proved generic API can handle > metadata readahead, I don''t want to do it.Right, it could be hard to export btrfs_inode. I''m glad you speak it out. If we cannot make it, it''s valuable to point out the problem and let everyone know the root cause we turn to an ioctl based workaround. Then others will understand the design choices, and if lucky, join us and help export the btrfs_inode. Thanks, Fengguang> > > > > this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore > > > > > syscall. > > > > > Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead > > > > > reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. > > > > > Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the > > > > > new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we > > > > > have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some > > > > > code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are > > > > > welcome! > > > > > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > > > 1. Added more comments and fix return values suggested by Andrew Morton > > > > > 2. fix a race condition pointed out by Yan Zheng > > > > > > > > > > initial post: > > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129222493406353&w=2 > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Shaohua > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > > > > > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > > > > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > > > > > >
Shaohua Li
2011-Jan-11 03:27 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 09:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:15:19AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > Shaohua, > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > > > > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > > > > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > > > > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > > > > > for btrfs. > > > > > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > > > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > > > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > > > > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > > > > > > > > > If that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ > > > > > fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden > > > > > btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and > > > > > have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know > > > > > ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead. > > > > I forgot to update this comment. Please see patch 2 and patch 4, both > > > > incore and readahead need btrfs specific staff involved, so we can''t use > > > > generic fincore or something. > > > > > > You can if you like :) > > > > > > - fincore() can return the referenced bit, which is generally > > > useful information > > metadata page in ext2/3 doesn''t have reference bit set, while btrfs has. > > we can''t blindly filter out such pages with the bit. > > block_dev inodes have the accessed bits. Look at the below output. > > /dev/sda5 is a mounted ext4 partition. The ''A''/''R'' in the > dump_page_cache lines stand for Active/Referenced.ext4 already does readahead? please check other filesystems. filesystem sues bread like API to read metadata, which definitely doesn''t set referenced bit.> root@bay /home/wfg# echo /dev/sda5 > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file > root@bay /home/wfg# cat /debug/tracing/trace > # tracer: nop > # > # TASK-PID CPU# TIMESTAMP FUNCTION > # | | | | | > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500764: dump_inode_cache: 0 55643986944 1703936 21879 D___ BLK mount /dev/sda5 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500774: dump_page_cache: 0 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500776: dump_page_cache: 2 3 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500777: dump_page_cache: 1026 5 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500778: dump_page_cache: 1031 3 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500779: dump_page_cache: 1034 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500780: dump_page_cache: 1035 2 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500781: dump_page_cache: 1037 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500782: dump_page_cache: 1038 3 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500782: dump_page_cache: 1041 1 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500783: dump_page_cache: 1057 1 ___AR_D___P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500788: dump_page_cache: 1058 6 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500788: dump_page_cache: 9249 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500789: dump_page_cache: 524289 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500790: dump_page_cache: 524290 2 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500790: dump_page_cache: 524292 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500791: dump_page_cache: 524293 1 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500796: dump_page_cache: 524294 9 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500797: dump_page_cache: 524303 1 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500798: dump_page_cache: 987136 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500798: dump_page_cache: 1048576 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500799: dump_page_cache: 1048577 2 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500800: dump_page_cache: 1048579 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500801: dump_page_cache: 1048580 5 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500802: dump_page_cache: 1048585 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500805: dump_page_cache: 1048586 5 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500805: dump_page_cache: 1048591 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500806: dump_page_cache: 1572864 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500807: dump_page_cache: 1572865 5 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500808: dump_page_cache: 1572870 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500811: dump_page_cache: 1572871 6 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500812: dump_page_cache: 1572877 3 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500816: dump_page_cache: 2097153 8 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500817: dump_page_cache: 2097161 1 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500818: dump_page_cache: 2097162 4 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500819: dump_page_cache: 6324224 1 ____R_D___P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500820: dump_page_cache: 6324225 3 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500825: dump_page_cache: 6324228 29 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500826: dump_page_cache: 6324257 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500828: dump_page_cache: 6324258 4 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500830: dump_page_cache: 6324262 11 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500833: dump_page_cache: 6324273 16 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500833: dump_page_cache: 6324289 1 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500834: dump_page_cache: 6324290 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500835: dump_page_cache: 6324292 8 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500836: dump_page_cache: 6324300 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500837: dump_page_cache: 6324302 3 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500838: dump_page_cache: 6324305 4 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500843: dump_page_cache: 6324309 28 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500844: dump_page_cache: 6324337 4 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500845: dump_page_cache: 6324341 2 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500850: dump_page_cache: 6324343 30 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500851: dump_page_cache: 6324373 2 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500852: dump_page_cache: 6324375 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500853: dump_page_cache: 6324377 9 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500854: dump_page_cache: 6324386 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500855: dump_page_cache: 6324388 5 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500856: dump_page_cache: 6324393 3 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500858: dump_page_cache: 6324396 11 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500859: dump_page_cache: 6324407 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500864: dump_page_cache: 6324408 31 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500864: dump_page_cache: 6324439 1 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500865: dump_page_cache: 6324440 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500866: dump_page_cache: 6324441 2 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500867: dump_page_cache: 6324443 5 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500872: dump_page_cache: 6324448 26 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500873: dump_page_cache: 6324474 6 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500874: dump_page_cache: 6324480 4 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500879: dump_page_cache: 6324484 28 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500880: dump_page_cache: 6324512 4 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500881: dump_page_cache: 6324516 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500881: dump_page_cache: 6324517 1 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500882: dump_page_cache: 6324518 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500888: dump_page_cache: 6324520 28 ___A______P 2 0 > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500890: dump_page_cache: 6324548 2 ____R_____P 2 0 > > > fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > > transparent to userspace. > > Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the > "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() > won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to > deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file > page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped > (anonymous) pages.if all filesystems have the bit set, I''ll buy-in. Otherwise, this isn''t generic enough.> Another option may be to use the above > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file interface. > > > > - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) > > > ->readpages() for use with fadvise. > > this need filesystem specific hook too, the difference is your proposal > > uses fadvise but I''m using ioctl. There isn''t big difference. > > True for btrfs. However they make big differences for other file systems.why?> > BTW, it''s hard to hook btrfs_inode to a fd even with a ioctl, at least I > > didn''t find a easy way to do this. It might be possible to do this for > > example adding a fake device or fake fs (anon_inode doesn''t work here, > > IIRC), which is a bit ugly. Before it''s proved generic API can handle > > metadata readahead, I don''t want to do it. > > Right, it could be hard to export btrfs_inode. I''m glad you speak it > out. If we cannot make it, it''s valuable to point out the problem and > let everyone know the root cause we turn to an ioctl based workaround. > Then others will understand the design choices, and if lucky, join us > and help export the btrfs_inode.I didn''t hide anything. I actually tell out this in the comments. this is what I said. In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook> > > > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls(readahead, mincore> > > > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode ishidden, there is> > > > > > no easy way for this from my understanding.Thanks, Shaohua> > > > > > this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore > > > > > > syscall. > > > > > > Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead > > > > > > reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. > > > > > > Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the > > > > > > new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we > > > > > > have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some > > > > > > code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are > > > > > > welcome! > > > > > > > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > > > > 1. Added more comments and fix return values suggested by Andrew Morton > > > > > > 2. fix a race condition pointed out by Yan Zheng > > > > > > > > > > > > initial post: > > > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129222493406353&w=2 > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Shaohua > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > > > > > > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > > > > > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > > > > > > > > > >
Wu Fengguang
2011-Jan-11 09:13 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:27:33AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:> On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 09:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:15:19AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > Shaohua, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > > > > > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > > > > > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > > > > > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > > > > > > for btrfs. > > > > > > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > > > > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > > > > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > > > > > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > > > > > > > > > > > If that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ > > > > > > fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden > > > > > > btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and > > > > > > have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know > > > > > > ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead. > > > > > I forgot to update this comment. Please see patch 2 and patch 4, both > > > > > incore and readahead need btrfs specific staff involved, so we can''t use > > > > > generic fincore or something. > > > > > > > > You can if you like :) > > > > > > > > - fincore() can return the referenced bit, which is generally > > > > useful information > > > metadata page in ext2/3 doesn''t have reference bit set, while btrfs has. > > > we can''t blindly filter out such pages with the bit. > > > > block_dev inodes have the accessed bits. Look at the below output. > > > > /dev/sda5 is a mounted ext4 partition. The ''A''/''R'' in the > > dump_page_cache lines stand for Active/Referenced. > ext4 already does readahead? please check other filesystems.ext3/4 does readahead on accessing large directories. However that''s orthogonal feature to the user space metadata readahead. The latter is still important for fast boot on ext3/4.> filesystem sues bread like API to read metadata, which definitely > doesn''t set referenced bit.__find_get_block() will call touch_buffer() which is a synonymous for mark_page_accessed().> > root@bay /home/wfg# echo /dev/sda5 > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file > > root@bay /home/wfg# cat /debug/tracing/trace > > # tracer: nop > > # > > # TASK-PID CPU# TIMESTAMP FUNCTION > > # | | | | | > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500764: dump_inode_cache: 0 55643986944 1703936 21879 D___ BLK mount /dev/sda5 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500774: dump_page_cache: 0 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500776: dump_page_cache: 2 3 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500777: dump_page_cache: 1026 5 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500778: dump_page_cache: 1031 3 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500779: dump_page_cache: 1034 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500780: dump_page_cache: 1035 2 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500781: dump_page_cache: 1037 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500782: dump_page_cache: 1038 3 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500782: dump_page_cache: 1041 1 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500783: dump_page_cache: 1057 1 ___AR_D___P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500788: dump_page_cache: 1058 6 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500788: dump_page_cache: 9249 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500789: dump_page_cache: 524289 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500790: dump_page_cache: 524290 2 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500790: dump_page_cache: 524292 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500791: dump_page_cache: 524293 1 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500796: dump_page_cache: 524294 9 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500797: dump_page_cache: 524303 1 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500798: dump_page_cache: 987136 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500798: dump_page_cache: 1048576 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500799: dump_page_cache: 1048577 2 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500800: dump_page_cache: 1048579 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500801: dump_page_cache: 1048580 5 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500802: dump_page_cache: 1048585 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500805: dump_page_cache: 1048586 5 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500805: dump_page_cache: 1048591 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500806: dump_page_cache: 1572864 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500807: dump_page_cache: 1572865 5 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500808: dump_page_cache: 1572870 1 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500811: dump_page_cache: 1572871 6 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500812: dump_page_cache: 1572877 3 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500816: dump_page_cache: 2097153 8 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500817: dump_page_cache: 2097161 1 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500818: dump_page_cache: 2097162 4 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500819: dump_page_cache: 6324224 1 ____R_D___P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500820: dump_page_cache: 6324225 3 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500825: dump_page_cache: 6324228 29 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500826: dump_page_cache: 6324257 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500828: dump_page_cache: 6324258 4 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500830: dump_page_cache: 6324262 11 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500833: dump_page_cache: 6324273 16 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500833: dump_page_cache: 6324289 1 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500834: dump_page_cache: 6324290 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500835: dump_page_cache: 6324292 8 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500836: dump_page_cache: 6324300 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500837: dump_page_cache: 6324302 3 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500838: dump_page_cache: 6324305 4 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500843: dump_page_cache: 6324309 28 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500844: dump_page_cache: 6324337 4 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500845: dump_page_cache: 6324341 2 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500850: dump_page_cache: 6324343 30 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500851: dump_page_cache: 6324373 2 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500852: dump_page_cache: 6324375 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500853: dump_page_cache: 6324377 9 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500854: dump_page_cache: 6324386 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500855: dump_page_cache: 6324388 5 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500856: dump_page_cache: 6324393 3 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500858: dump_page_cache: 6324396 11 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500859: dump_page_cache: 6324407 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500864: dump_page_cache: 6324408 31 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500864: dump_page_cache: 6324439 1 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500865: dump_page_cache: 6324440 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500866: dump_page_cache: 6324441 2 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500867: dump_page_cache: 6324443 5 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500872: dump_page_cache: 6324448 26 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500873: dump_page_cache: 6324474 6 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500874: dump_page_cache: 6324480 4 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500879: dump_page_cache: 6324484 28 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500880: dump_page_cache: 6324512 4 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500881: dump_page_cache: 6324516 1 ____R_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500881: dump_page_cache: 6324517 1 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500882: dump_page_cache: 6324518 2 ___AR_____P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500888: dump_page_cache: 6324520 28 ___A______P 2 0 > > zsh-2950 [003] 879.500890: dump_page_cache: 6324548 2 ____R_____P 2 0 > > > > > fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > > > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > > > transparent to userspace. > > > > Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the > > "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() > > won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to > > deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file > > page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped > > (anonymous) pages. > if all filesystems have the bit set, I''ll buy-in. Otherwise, this isn''t generic enough.It''s a reasonable thing to set the accessed bits. So I believe the various filesystems are calling mark_page_accessed() on their metadata inode, or can be changed to do it.> > Another option may be to use the above > > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file interface. > > > > > > - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) > > > > ->readpages() for use with fadvise. > > > this need filesystem specific hook too, the difference is your proposal > > > uses fadvise but I''m using ioctl. There isn''t big difference. > > > > True for btrfs. However they make big differences for other file systems. > why?The block_dev of ext2/3/4 can do metadata query/readahead directly with fincore()+fadvise(), with no need for any additional ioctls. Given that the vast majority desktops are running ext2/3/4, it seems worthwhile to have a straightforward solution for them.> > > BTW, it''s hard to hook btrfs_inode to a fd even with a ioctl, at least I > > > didn''t find a easy way to do this. It might be possible to do this for > > > example adding a fake device or fake fs (anon_inode doesn''t work here, > > > IIRC), which is a bit ugly. Before it''s proved generic API can handle > > > metadata readahead, I don''t want to do it. > > > > Right, it could be hard to export btrfs_inode. I''m glad you speak it > > out. If we cannot make it, it''s valuable to point out the problem and > > let everyone know the root cause we turn to an ioctl based workaround. > > Then others will understand the design choices, and if lucky, join us > > and help export the btrfs_inode. > I didn''t hide anything. I actually tell out this in the comments. this > is what I said.Ah, sorry for overlooking this message! Thanks, Fengguang> In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > > > > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls > (readahead, mincore > > > > > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is > hidden, there is > > > > > > > no easy way for this from my understanding. > > > Thanks, > Shaohua > > > > > > > this. One is like readahead syscall, the other is like micore/fincore > > > > > > > syscall. > > > > > > > Under a harddisk based netbook with Meego, the metadata readahead > > > > > > > reduced about 3.5s boot time in average from total 16s. > > > > > > > Last time I posted similar patches to btrfs maillist, which adds the > > > > > > > new ioctls in btrfs specific ioctl code. But Christoph Hellwig asks we > > > > > > > have a generic interface to do this so other filesystem can share some > > > > > > > code, so I came up with the new one. Comments and suggestions are > > > > > > > welcome! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > > > > > 1. Added more comments and fix return values suggested by Andrew Morton > > > > > > > 2. fix a race condition pointed out by Yan Zheng > > > > > > > > > > > > > > initial post: > > > > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129222493406353&w=2 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Shaohua > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > > > > > > > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > > > > > > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Shaohua Li
2011-Jan-12 02:55 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:13:53PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:27:33AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 09:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:15:19AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > > Shaohua, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > > > > > > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > > > > > > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > > > > > > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > > > > > > > for btrfs. > > > > > > > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > > > > > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > > > > > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > > > > > > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ > > > > > > > fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden > > > > > > > btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and > > > > > > > have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know > > > > > > > ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead. > > > > > > I forgot to update this comment. Please see patch 2 and patch 4, both > > > > > > incore and readahead need btrfs specific staff involved, so we can''t use > > > > > > generic fincore or something. > > > > > > > > > > You can if you like :) > > > > > > > > > > - fincore() can return the referenced bit, which is generally > > > > > useful information > > > > metadata page in ext2/3 doesn''t have reference bit set, while btrfs has. > > > > we can''t blindly filter out such pages with the bit. > > > > > > block_dev inodes have the accessed bits. Look at the below output. > > > > > > /dev/sda5 is a mounted ext4 partition. The ''A''/''R'' in the > > > dump_page_cache lines stand for Active/Referenced. > > ext4 already does readahead? please check other filesystems. > > ext3/4 does readahead on accessing large directories. However that''s > orthogonal feature to the user space metadata readahead. The latter is > still important for fast boot on ext3/4. > > > filesystem sues bread like API to read metadata, which definitely > > doesn''t set referenced bit. > > __find_get_block() will call touch_buffer() which is a synonymous for > mark_page_accessed().yes, but only when the buffer is accessed at the second time.> > > > fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > > > > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > > > > transparent to userspace. > > > > > > Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the > > > "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() > > > won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to > > > deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file > > > page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped > > > (anonymous) pages. > > if all filesystems have the bit set, I''ll buy-in. Otherwise, this isn''t generic enough. > > It''s a reasonable thing to set the accessed bits. So I believe the > various filesystems are calling mark_page_accessed() on their metadata > inode, or can be changed to do it.yes, we can, with a lot of pain. And filesystems must be smart to avoid marking the bit for pages which are readahead in but actually are invalid. The second patch in the series has more detailed infomation about this issue. The problem is if this is really worthy for metadata readahead. Some filesystems might don''t care about metadata readahead. If we make fincore check the bit, then fincore syscall will not work for such filesystems, which is bad.> > > Another option may be to use the above > > > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file interface. > > > > > > > > - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) > > > > > ->readpages() for use with fadvise. > > > > this need filesystem specific hook too, the difference is your proposal > > > > uses fadvise but I''m using ioctl. There isn''t big difference. > > > > > > True for btrfs. However they make big differences for other file systems. > > why? > > The block_dev of ext2/3/4 can do metadata query/readahead directly > with fincore()+fadvise(), with no need for any additional ioctls. > > Given that the vast majority desktops are running ext2/3/4, it seems > worthwhile to have a straightforward solution for them.This does make ext filesystem metadata readahead straightforward, but gives a lot of pain for other filesystems. And even for ext filesystem, we need take care about the ''invalid page'' issue above. On the other hand, with the ioctls approach, we can still make ext filesystem metadata readahead straightforward (just several lines of code, we can even add a lib API for such filesystems) We''d better have a more generic approach for all filelsystems, while the ioctl apporoach is better. Thanks, Shaohua
Wu Fengguang
2011-Jan-16 03:38 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:55:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:13:53PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:27:33AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 09:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:15:19AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > > > Shaohua, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > > > > > > > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > > > > > > > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > > > > > > > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > > > > > > > > for btrfs. > > > > > > > > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > > > > > > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > > > > > > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > > > > > > > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ > > > > > > > > fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden > > > > > > > > btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and > > > > > > > > have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know > > > > > > > > ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead. > > > > > > > I forgot to update this comment. Please see patch 2 and patch 4, both > > > > > > > incore and readahead need btrfs specific staff involved, so we can''t use > > > > > > > generic fincore or something. > > > > > > > > > > > > You can if you like :) > > > > > > > > > > > > - fincore() can return the referenced bit, which is generally > > > > > > useful information > > > > > metadata page in ext2/3 doesn''t have reference bit set, while btrfs has. > > > > > we can''t blindly filter out such pages with the bit. > > > > > > > > block_dev inodes have the accessed bits. Look at the below output. > > > > > > > > /dev/sda5 is a mounted ext4 partition. The ''A''/''R'' in the > > > > dump_page_cache lines stand for Active/Referenced. > > > ext4 already does readahead? please check other filesystems. > > > > ext3/4 does readahead on accessing large directories. However that''s > > orthogonal feature to the user space metadata readahead. The latter is > > still important for fast boot on ext3/4. > > > > > filesystem sues bread like API to read metadata, which definitely > > > doesn''t set referenced bit. > > > > __find_get_block() will call touch_buffer() which is a synonymous for > > mark_page_accessed(). > yes, but only when the buffer is accessed at the second time.Not likely. Otherwise it would be a performance bug. __getblk() has two code paths, both will call touch_buffer(). a) __find_get_block() touch_buffer() b) __getblk_slow __find_get_block() touch_buffer()> > > > > fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > > > > > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > > > > > transparent to userspace. > > > > > > > > Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the > > > > "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() > > > > won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to > > > > deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file > > > > page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped > > > > (anonymous) pages. > > > if all filesystems have the bit set, I''ll buy-in. Otherwise, this isn''t generic enough. > > > > It''s a reasonable thing to set the accessed bits. So I believe the > > various filesystems are calling mark_page_accessed() on their metadata > > inode, or can be changed to do it. > yes, we can, with a lot of pain. And filesystems must be smart to avoid marking the bit > for pages which are readahead in but actually are invalid. The second patch in the series"invalid" means !PG_uptodate? I wonder why there is a need to test that bit at all. !PG_uptodate seems an unrelated transitional state.> has more detailed infomation about this issue. The problem is if this is really worthy > for metadata readahead. Some filesystems might don''t care about metadata readahead. If > we make fincore check the bit, then fincore syscall will not work for such filesystems, > which is bad.fincore() will always work as is. If the filesystem don''t care about metadata readahead, then the metadata readahead that makes use of the bits will naturally not work for them?> > > > Another option may be to use the above > > > > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file interface. > > > > > > > > > > - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) > > > > > > ->readpages() for use with fadvise. > > > > > this need filesystem specific hook too, the difference is your proposal > > > > > uses fadvise but I''m using ioctl. There isn''t big difference. > > > > > > > > True for btrfs. However they make big differences for other file systems. > > > why? > > > > The block_dev of ext2/3/4 can do metadata query/readahead directly > > with fincore()+fadvise(), with no need for any additional ioctls. > > > > Given that the vast majority desktops are running ext2/3/4, it seems > > worthwhile to have a straightforward solution for them. > This does make ext filesystem metadata readahead straightforward, but gives a lot > of pain for other filesystems. And even for ext filesystem, we need take care > about the ''invalid page'' issue above. > On the other hand, with the ioctls approach, we can still make ext filesystem > metadata readahead straightforward (just several lines of code, we can even > add a lib API for such filesystems) > We''d better have a more generic approach for all filelsystems, while the ioctl > apporoach is better.Although I''m not all that fond of adding ioctls, I can understand the difficulties and won''t insist on you doing it the other way. Thanks, Fengguang
Shaohua Li
2011-Jan-17 01:32 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 11:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:55:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:13:53PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:27:33AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 09:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:15:19AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > > > > Shaohua, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata > > > > > > > > > > readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented > > > > > > > > > > disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the > > > > > > > > > > efficiency of readahead much. The patches try to add meatadata readahead > > > > > > > > > > for btrfs. > > > > > > > > > > In btrfs, metadata is stored in btree_inode. Ideally, if we could hook > > > > > > > > > > the inode to a fd so we could use existing syscalls (readahead, mincore > > > > > > > > > > or upcoming fincore) to do readahead, but the inode is hidden, there is > > > > > > > > > > no easy way for this from my understanding. So we add two ioctls for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If that is the main obstacle, why not do straightforward fincore()/ > > > > > > > > > fadvise(), and add ioctls to btrfs to export/grab the hidden > > > > > > > > > btree_inode in any form? This will address btrfs'' specific issue, and > > > > > > > > > have the benefit of making the VFS part general enough. You know > > > > > > > > > ext2/3/4 already have block_dev ready for metadata readahead. > > > > > > > > I forgot to update this comment. Please see patch 2 and patch 4, both > > > > > > > > incore and readahead need btrfs specific staff involved, so we can''t use > > > > > > > > generic fincore or something. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can if you like :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - fincore() can return the referenced bit, which is generally > > > > > > > useful information > > > > > > metadata page in ext2/3 doesn''t have reference bit set, while btrfs has. > > > > > > we can''t blindly filter out such pages with the bit. > > > > > > > > > > block_dev inodes have the accessed bits. Look at the below output. > > > > > > > > > > /dev/sda5 is a mounted ext4 partition. The ''A''/''R'' in the > > > > > dump_page_cache lines stand for Active/Referenced. > > > > ext4 already does readahead? please check other filesystems. > > > > > > ext3/4 does readahead on accessing large directories. However that''s > > > orthogonal feature to the user space metadata readahead. The latter is > > > still important for fast boot on ext3/4. > > > > > > > filesystem sues bread like API to read metadata, which definitely > > > > doesn''t set referenced bit. > > > > > > __find_get_block() will call touch_buffer() which is a synonymous for > > > mark_page_accessed(). > > yes, but only when the buffer is accessed at the second time. > > Not likely. Otherwise it would be a performance bug. > > __getblk() has two code paths, both will call touch_buffer(). > > a) > __find_get_block() > touch_buffer() > b) > __getblk_slow > __find_get_block() > touch_buffer()I missed this, sorry.> > > > > > fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > > > > > > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > > > > > > transparent to userspace. > > > > > > > > > > Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the > > > > > "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() > > > > > won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to > > > > > deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file > > > > > page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped > > > > > (anonymous) pages. > > > > if all filesystems have the bit set, I''ll buy-in. Otherwise, this isn''t generic enough. > > > > > > It''s a reasonable thing to set the accessed bits. So I believe the > > > various filesystems are calling mark_page_accessed() on their metadata > > > inode, or can be changed to do it. > > yes, we can, with a lot of pain. And filesystems must be smart to avoid marking the bit > > for pages which are readahead in but actually are invalid. The second patch in the series > > "invalid" means !PG_uptodate? I wonder why there is a need to test > that bit at all. !PG_uptodate seems an unrelated transitional state.not PG_update, it''s referenced bit. A readahead metadata page will have update bit set, but it might not have referenced bit if it''s an obsolete page. btrfs doesn''t use the buffer_head> > has more detailed infomation about this issue. The problem is if this is really worthy > > for metadata readahead. Some filesystems might don''t care about metadata readahead. If > > we make fincore check the bit, then fincore syscall will not work for such filesystems, > > which is bad. > > fincore() will always work as is. If the filesystem don''t care about > metadata readahead, then the metadata readahead that makes use of the > bits will naturally not work for them?yes, they don''t care about readahead, but they do care about fincore output. if fincore() checks the bits, it doesn''t work even for normal file pages, if the pages get deactivated.> > > > > Another option may be to use the above > > > > > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file interface. > > > > > > > > > > > > - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) > > > > > > > ->readpages() for use with fadvise. > > > > > > this need filesystem specific hook too, the difference is your proposal > > > > > > uses fadvise but I''m using ioctl. There isn''t big difference. > > > > > > > > > > True for btrfs. However they make big differences for other file systems. > > > > why? > > > > > > The block_dev of ext2/3/4 can do metadata query/readahead directly > > > with fincore()+fadvise(), with no need for any additional ioctls. > > > > > > Given that the vast majority desktops are running ext2/3/4, it seems > > > worthwhile to have a straightforward solution for them. > > This does make ext filesystem metadata readahead straightforward, but gives a lot > > of pain for other filesystems. And even for ext filesystem, we need take care > > about the ''invalid page'' issue above. > > On the other hand, with the ioctls approach, we can still make ext filesystem > > metadata readahead straightforward (just several lines of code, we can even > > add a lib API for such filesystems) > > We''d better have a more generic approach for all filelsystems, while the ioctl > > apporoach is better. > > Although I''m not all that fond of adding ioctls, I can understand the > difficulties and won''t insist on you doing it the other way.Thanks!
Wu Fengguang
2011-Jan-18 04:41 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 09:32:37AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:> On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 11:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:55:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:13:53PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:27:33AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:> > > > > > > fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > > > > > > > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > > > > > > > transparent to userspace. > > > > > > > > > > > > Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the > > > > > > "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() > > > > > > won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to > > > > > > deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file > > > > > > page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped > > > > > > (anonymous) pages. > > > > > if all filesystems have the bit set, I''ll buy-in. Otherwise, this isn''t generic enough. > > > > > > > > It''s a reasonable thing to set the accessed bits. So I believe the > > > > various filesystems are calling mark_page_accessed() on their metadata > > > > inode, or can be changed to do it. > > > yes, we can, with a lot of pain. And filesystems must be smart to avoid marking the bit > > > for pages which are readahead in but actually are invalid. The second patch in the series > > > > "invalid" means !PG_uptodate? I wonder why there is a need to test > > that bit at all. !PG_uptodate seems an unrelated transitional state. > not PG_update, it''s referenced bit. A readahead metadata page will have update bit set, > but it might not have referenced bit if it''s an obsolete page. btrfs > doesn''t use the buffer_headI do see PageUptodate() tests in your patch, perhaps they be removed?> > > has more detailed infomation about this issue. The problem is if this is really worthy > > > for metadata readahead. Some filesystems might don''t care about metadata readahead. If > > > we make fincore check the bit, then fincore syscall will not work for such filesystems, > > > which is bad. > > > > fincore() will always work as is. If the filesystem don''t care about > > metadata readahead, then the metadata readahead that makes use of the > > bits will naturally not work for them? > yes, they don''t care about readahead, but they do care about fincore > output.fincore() just reports the accessed bits as is. If the filesystem does not use blockdev or export its internal metadata inode, the user won''t be able to run fincore() on the metadata inode at all.> if fincore() checks the bits, it doesn''t work even for normal file > pages, if the pages get deactivated.That''s a problem independent of the interface. And for user space readahead, it can be nicely fixed by collecting the pages-to-readahead before the free pages drop low, ie. before any page reclaim actions. It''s "nice" because you don''t want to readahead more data than cache-able anyway and avoid thrashing for small memory systems.> > > > > > Another option may be to use the above > > > > > > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file interface. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) > > > > > > > > ->readpages() for use with fadvise. > > > > > > > this need filesystem specific hook too, the difference is your proposal > > > > > > > uses fadvise but I''m using ioctl. There isn''t big difference. > > > > > > > > > > > > True for btrfs. However they make big differences for other file systems. > > > > > why? > > > > > > > > The block_dev of ext2/3/4 can do metadata query/readahead directly > > > > with fincore()+fadvise(), with no need for any additional ioctls. > > > > > > > > Given that the vast majority desktops are running ext2/3/4, it seems > > > > worthwhile to have a straightforward solution for them. > > > This does make ext filesystem metadata readahead straightforward, but gives a lot > > > of pain for other filesystems. And even for ext filesystem, we need take care > > > about the ''invalid page'' issue above. > > > On the other hand, with the ioctls approach, we can still make ext filesystem > > > metadata readahead straightforward (just several lines of code, we can even > > > add a lib API for such filesystems) > > > We''d better have a more generic approach for all filelsystems, while the ioctl > > > apporoach is better. > > > > Although I''m not all that fond of adding ioctls, I can understand the > > difficulties and won''t insist on you doing it the other way. > Thanks!I''m not sure how reality it is, but the other wild ideas that intrigued me exporting the btrfs_inode in the initial plan is, it might enable some interesting btrfs use cases. For example, to write some user space lib/tool to examine btrfs_inode and do live fsck on some snapshot. Or to mount btrfs only to read/write btrfs_inode, to make use of btrfs'' low level (RAID?) functionalities. Just play for fun :) Thanks, Fengguang
Shaohua Li
2011-Jan-18 05:15 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 12:41 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 09:32:37AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 11:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:55:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:13:53PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:27:33AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > > > fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > > > > > > > > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > > > > > > > > transparent to userspace. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the > > > > > > > "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() > > > > > > > won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to > > > > > > > deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file > > > > > > > page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped > > > > > > > (anonymous) pages. > > > > > > if all filesystems have the bit set, I''ll buy-in. Otherwise, this isn''t generic enough. > > > > > > > > > > It''s a reasonable thing to set the accessed bits. So I believe the > > > > > various filesystems are calling mark_page_accessed() on their metadata > > > > > inode, or can be changed to do it. > > > > yes, we can, with a lot of pain. And filesystems must be smart to avoid marking the bit > > > > for pages which are readahead in but actually are invalid. The second patch in the series > > > > > > "invalid" means !PG_uptodate? I wonder why there is a need to test > > > that bit at all. !PG_uptodate seems an unrelated transitional state. > > not PG_update, it''s referenced bit. A readahead metadata page will have update bit set, > > but it might not have referenced bit if it''s an obsolete page. btrfs > > doesn''t use the buffer_head > > I do see PageUptodate() tests in your patch, perhaps they be removed?uptodate bit isn''t really needed, but I added it to make sure the page is valid.> > > > has more detailed infomation about this issue. The problem is if this is really worthy > > > > for metadata readahead. Some filesystems might don''t care about metadata readahead. If > > > > we make fincore check the bit, then fincore syscall will not work for such filesystems, > > > > which is bad. > > > > > > fincore() will always work as is. If the filesystem don''t care about > > > metadata readahead, then the metadata readahead that makes use of the > > > bits will naturally not work for them? > > yes, they don''t care about readahead, but they do care about fincore > > output. > > fincore() just reports the accessed bits as is. If the filesystem does > not use blockdev or export its internal metadata inode, the user won''t > be able to run fincore() on the metadata inode at all. > > > if fincore() checks the bits, it doesn''t work even for normal file > > pages, if the pages get deactivated. > > That''s a problem independent of the interface. And for user space > readahead, it can be nicely fixed by collecting the pages-to-readahead > before the free pages drop low, ie. before any page reclaim actions. > It''s "nice" because you don''t want to readahead more data than > cache-able anyway and avoid thrashing for small memory systems.My point is fincore() isn''t designed only for readahead. People will use it like mincore, which is its normal usage. Checking the bits will break its normal usage, because fincore just doesn''t check if the fd means a metadata inode.> > > > > > > Another option may be to use the above > > > > > > > /debug/tracing/objects/mm/pages/dump-file interface. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - btrfs_metadata_readahead() can be passed to some (faked) > > > > > > > > > ->readpages() for use with fadvise. > > > > > > > > this need filesystem specific hook too, the difference is your proposal > > > > > > > > uses fadvise but I''m using ioctl. There isn''t big difference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > True for btrfs. However they make big differences for other file systems. > > > > > > why? > > > > > > > > > > The block_dev of ext2/3/4 can do metadata query/readahead directly > > > > > with fincore()+fadvise(), with no need for any additional ioctls. > > > > > > > > > > Given that the vast majority desktops are running ext2/3/4, it seems > > > > > worthwhile to have a straightforward solution for them. > > > > This does make ext filesystem metadata readahead straightforward, but gives a lot > > > > of pain for other filesystems. And even for ext filesystem, we need take care > > > > about the ''invalid page'' issue above. > > > > On the other hand, with the ioctls approach, we can still make ext filesystem > > > > metadata readahead straightforward (just several lines of code, we can even > > > > add a lib API for such filesystems) > > > > We''d better have a more generic approach for all filelsystems, while the ioctl > > > > apporoach is better. > > > > > > Although I''m not all that fond of adding ioctls, I can understand the > > > difficulties and won''t insist on you doing it the other way. > > Thanks! > > I''m not sure how reality it is, but the other wild ideas that > intrigued me exporting the btrfs_inode in the initial plan is, it > might enable some interesting btrfs use cases. For example, to write > some user space lib/tool to examine btrfs_inode and do live fsck on > some snapshot. Or to mount btrfs only to read/write btrfs_inode, to > make use of btrfs'' low level (RAID?) functionalities. > > Just play for fun :)get it. don''t know if there is valid usage though. Thanks, Shaohua -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Wu Fengguang
2011-Jan-18 06:22 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 01:15:27PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:> On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 12:41 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 09:32:37AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 11:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:55:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:13:53PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:27:33AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > > > > > > > > > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > > > > > > > > > transparent to userspace. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the > > > > > > > > "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() > > > > > > > > won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to > > > > > > > > deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file > > > > > > > > page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped > > > > > > > > (anonymous) pages. > > > > > > > if all filesystems have the bit set, I''ll buy-in. Otherwise, this isn''t generic enough. > > > > > > > > > > > > It''s a reasonable thing to set the accessed bits. So I believe the > > > > > > various filesystems are calling mark_page_accessed() on their metadata > > > > > > inode, or can be changed to do it. > > > > > yes, we can, with a lot of pain. And filesystems must be smart to avoid marking the bit > > > > > for pages which are readahead in but actually are invalid. The second patch in the series > > > > > > > > "invalid" means !PG_uptodate? I wonder why there is a need to test > > > > that bit at all. !PG_uptodate seems an unrelated transitional state. > > > not PG_update, it''s referenced bit. A readahead metadata page will have update bit set, > > > but it might not have referenced bit if it''s an obsolete page. btrfs > > > doesn''t use the buffer_head > > > > I do see PageUptodate() tests in your patch, perhaps they be removed? > uptodate bit isn''t really needed, but I added it to make sure the page > is valid.It may be nit pick, but I always try to remove optional code. The PageUptodate() looks like an irrelevant test and a good candidate to remove.> > > > > has more detailed infomation about this issue. The problem is if this is really worthy > > > > > for metadata readahead. Some filesystems might don''t care about metadata readahead. If > > > > > we make fincore check the bit, then fincore syscall will not work for such filesystems, > > > > > which is bad. > > > > > > > > fincore() will always work as is. If the filesystem don''t care about > > > > metadata readahead, then the metadata readahead that makes use of the > > > > bits will naturally not work for them? > > > yes, they don''t care about readahead, but they do care about fincore > > > output. > > > > fincore() just reports the accessed bits as is. If the filesystem does > > not use blockdev or export its internal metadata inode, the user won''t > > be able to run fincore() on the metadata inode at all. > > > > > if fincore() checks the bits, it doesn''t work even for normal file > > > pages, if the pages get deactivated. > > > > That''s a problem independent of the interface. And for user space > > readahead, it can be nicely fixed by collecting the pages-to-readahead > > before the free pages drop low, ie. before any page reclaim actions. > > It''s "nice" because you don''t want to readahead more data than > > cache-able anyway and avoid thrashing for small memory systems. > My point is fincore() isn''t designed only for readahead. People will use > it like mincore, which is its normal usage. Checking the bits will break > its normal usage, because fincore just doesn''t check if the fd means a > metadata inode.Sorry, you missed my point :) I mean to export the accessed bits as-is via the fincore() interface, not to check the accessed bits and then report "page not cached" to user space for !PG_referenced pages. Thanks, Fengguang
Shaohua Li
2011-Jan-18 06:35 UTC
Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] add new ioctls to do metadata readahead in btrfs
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 14:22 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 01:15:27PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 12:41 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 09:32:37AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 11:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:55:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:13:53PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:27:33AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > fincore can takes a parameter or it returns a bit to distinguish > > > > > > > > > > referenced pages, but I don''t think it''s a good API. This should be > > > > > > > > > > transparent to userspace. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Users care about the "cached" status may well be interested in the > > > > > > > > > "active/referenced" status. They are co-related information. fincore() > > > > > > > > > won''t be a simple replication of mincore() anyway. fincore() has to > > > > > > > > > deal with huge sparsely accessed files. The accessed bits of a file > > > > > > > > > page are normally more meaningful than the accessed bits of mapped > > > > > > > > > (anonymous) pages. > > > > > > > > if all filesystems have the bit set, I''ll buy-in. Otherwise, this isn''t generic enough. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It''s a reasonable thing to set the accessed bits. So I believe the > > > > > > > various filesystems are calling mark_page_accessed() on their metadata > > > > > > > inode, or can be changed to do it. > > > > > > yes, we can, with a lot of pain. And filesystems must be smart to avoid marking the bit > > > > > > for pages which are readahead in but actually are invalid. The second patch in the series > > > > > > > > > > "invalid" means !PG_uptodate? I wonder why there is a need to test > > > > > that bit at all. !PG_uptodate seems an unrelated transitional state. > > > > not PG_update, it''s referenced bit. A readahead metadata page will have update bit set, > > > > but it might not have referenced bit if it''s an obsolete page. btrfs > > > > doesn''t use the buffer_head > > > > > > I do see PageUptodate() tests in your patch, perhaps they be removed? > > uptodate bit isn''t really needed, but I added it to make sure the page > > is valid. > > It may be nit pick, but I always try to remove optional code. The > PageUptodate() looks like an irrelevant test and a good candidate to > remove.ok, I can do this.> > > > > > has more detailed infomation about this issue. The problem is if this is really worthy > > > > > > for metadata readahead. Some filesystems might don''t care about metadata readahead. If > > > > > > we make fincore check the bit, then fincore syscall will not work for such filesystems, > > > > > > which is bad. > > > > > > > > > > fincore() will always work as is. If the filesystem don''t care about > > > > > metadata readahead, then the metadata readahead that makes use of the > > > > > bits will naturally not work for them? > > > > yes, they don''t care about readahead, but they do care about fincore > > > > output. > > > > > > fincore() just reports the accessed bits as is. If the filesystem does > > > not use blockdev or export its internal metadata inode, the user won''t > > > be able to run fincore() on the metadata inode at all. > > > > > > > if fincore() checks the bits, it doesn''t work even for normal file > > > > pages, if the pages get deactivated. > > > > > > That''s a problem independent of the interface. And for user space > > > readahead, it can be nicely fixed by collecting the pages-to-readahead > > > before the free pages drop low, ie. before any page reclaim actions. > > > It''s "nice" because you don''t want to readahead more data than > > > cache-able anyway and avoid thrashing for small memory systems. > > My point is fincore() isn''t designed only for readahead. People will use > > it like mincore, which is its normal usage. Checking the bits will break > > its normal usage, because fincore just doesn''t check if the fd means a > > metadata inode. > > Sorry, you missed my point :) I mean to export the accessed bits as-is > via the fincore() interface, not to check the accessed bits and then > report "page not cached" to user space for !PG_referenced pages.I thought you said this before, and I think it''s a bad API. userspace should not be aware of such bits, because they are kernel internal. Except the readahead usage, I can''t imagine why userspace needs to know the bits. Thanks, Shaohua -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html