Linux-Fsdevel Archive on lore.kernel.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> To: io-uring@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: [PATCHSET v4 0/12] Add support for async buffered reads Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 13:21:54 -0600 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20200524192206.4093-1-axboe@kernel.dk> (raw) We technically support this already through io_uring, but it's implemented with a thread backend to support cases where we would block. This isn't ideal. After a few prep patches, the core of this patchset is adding support for async callbacks on page unlock. With this primitive, we can simply retry the IO operation. With io_uring, this works a lot like poll based retry for files that support it. If a page is currently locked and needed, -EIOCBQUEUED is returned with a callback armed. The callers callback is responsible for restarting the operation. With this callback primitive, we can add support for generic_file_buffered_read(), which is what most file systems end up using for buffered reads. XFS/ext4/btrfs/bdev is wired up, but probably trivial to add more. The file flags support for this by setting FMODE_BUF_RASYNC, similar to what we do for FMODE_NOWAIT. Open to suggestions here if this is the preferred method or not. In terms of results, I wrote a small test app that randomly reads 4G of data in 4K chunks from a file hosted by ext4. The app uses a queue depth of 32. If you want to test yourself, you can just use buffered=1 with ioengine=io_uring with fio. No application changes are needed to use the more optimized buffered async read. preadv for comparison: real 1m13.821s user 0m0.558s sys 0m11.125s CPU ~13% Mainline: real 0m12.054s user 0m0.111s sys 0m5.659s CPU ~32% + ~50% == ~82% This patchset: real 0m9.283s user 0m0.147s sys 0m4.619s CPU ~52% The CPU numbers are just a rough estimate. For the mainline io_uring run, this includes the app itself and all the threads doing IO on its behalf (32% for the app, ~1.6% per worker and 32 of them). Context switch rate is much smaller with the patchset, since we only have the one task performing IO. Also ran a simple fio based test case, varying the queue depth from 1 to 16, doubling every time: [buf-test] filename=/data/file direct=0 ioengine=io_uring norandommap rw=randread bs=4k iodepth=${QD} randseed=89 runtime=10s QD/Test Patchset IOPS Mainline IOPS 1 9046 8294 2 19.8k 18.9k 4 39.2k 28.5k 8 64.4k 31.4k 16 65.7k 37.8k Outside of my usual environment, so this is just running on a virtualized NVMe device in qemu, using ext4 as the file system. NVMe isn't very efficient virtualized, so we run out of steam at ~65K which is why we flatline on the patched side (nvme_submit_cmd() eats ~75% of the test app CPU). Before that happens, it's a linear increase. Not shown is context switch rate, which is massively lower with the new code. The old thread offload adds a blocking thread per pending IO, so context rate quickly goes through the roof. The goal here is efficiency. Async thread offload adds latency, and it also adds noticable overhead on items such as adding pages to the page cache. By allowing proper async buffered read support, we don't have X threads hammering on the same inode page cache, we have just the single app actually doing IO. Been beating on this and it's solid for me, and I'm now pretty happy with how it all turned out. Not aware of any missing bits/pieces or code cleanups that need doing. Series can also be found here: https://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/log/?h=async-buffered.4 or pull from: git://git.kernel.dk/linux-block async-buffered.4 fs/block_dev.c | 2 +- fs/btrfs/file.c | 2 +- fs/ext4/file.c | 2 +- fs/io_uring.c | 114 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 2 +- include/linux/blk_types.h | 3 +- include/linux/fs.h | 10 +++- include/linux/pagemap.h | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++ mm/filemap.c | 111 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- 9 files changed, 267 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-) Changes since v3: - io_uring: don't retry if REQ_F_NOWAIT is set - io_uring: alloc req->io if the request type didn't already - Add iocb->ki_waitq instead of (ab)using iocb->private Changes since v2: - Get rid of unnecessary wait_page_async struct, just use wait_page_async - Add another prep handler, adding wake_page_match() - Use wake_page_match() in both callers Changes since v1: - Fix an issue with inline page locking - Fix a potential race with __wait_on_page_locked_async() - Fix a hang related to not setting page_match, thus missing a wakeup -- Jens Axboe
next reply other threads:[~2020-05-24 19:23 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-05-24 19:21 Jens Axboe [this message] 2020-05-24 19:21 ` [PATCH 01/12] block: read-ahead submission should imply no-wait as well Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:21 ` [PATCH 02/12] mm: allow read-ahead with IOCB_NOWAIT set Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:21 ` [PATCH 03/12] mm: abstract out wake_page_match() from wake_page_function() Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:21 ` [PATCH 04/12] mm: add support for async page locking Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:21 ` [PATCH 05/12] mm: support async buffered reads in generic_file_buffered_read() Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:22 ` [PATCH 06/12] fs: add FMODE_BUF_RASYNC Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:22 ` [PATCH 07/12] ext4: flag as supporting buffered async reads Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:22 ` [PATCH 08/12] block: flag block devices as supporting IOCB_WAITQ Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:22 ` [PATCH 09/12] xfs: flag files as supporting buffered async reads Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:22 ` [PATCH 10/12] btrfs: " Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:22 ` [PATCH 11/12] mm: add kiocb_wait_page_queue_init() helper Jens Axboe 2020-05-24 19:22 ` [PATCH 12/12] io_uring: support true async buffered reads, if file provides it Jens Axboe
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=20200524192206.4093-1-axboe@kernel.dk \ --to=axboe@kernel.dk \ --cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe 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; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).