Re: [patch 8/8] raid5: create multiple threads to handle stripes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 16:02:00 +0800 Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Like raid 1/10, raid5 uses one thread to handle stripe. In a fast storage, the
> thread becomes a bottleneck. raid5 can offload calculation like checksum to
> async threads. And if storge is fast, scheduling async work and running async
> work will introduce heavy lock contention of workqueue, which makes such
> optimization useless. And calculation isn't the only bottleneck. For example,
> in my test raid5 thread must handle > 450k requests per second. Just doing
> dispatch and completion will make raid5 thread incapable. The only chance to
> scale is using several threads to handle stripe.
> 
> With this patch, user can create several extra threads to handle stripe. How
> many threads are better depending on disk number, so the thread number can be
> changed in userspace. By default, the thread number is 0, which means no extra
> thread.
> 
> In a 3-disk raid5 setup, 2 extra threads can provide 130% throughput
> improvement (double stripe_cache_size) and the throughput is pretty close to
> theory value. With >=4 disks, the improvement is even bigger, for example, can
> improve 200% for 4-disk setup, but the throughput is far less than theory
> value, which is caused by several factors like request queue lock contention,
> cache issue, latency introduced by how a stripe is handled in different disks.
> Those factors need further investigations.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

I think it is great that you have got RAID5 to the point where multiple
threads improve performance.
I really don't like the idea of having to configure that number of threads.

It would be great if it would auto-configure.
Maybe the main thread could fork aux threads when it notices a high load.
e.g. if it has been servicing requests for more than 100ms without a break,
and the number of threads is less than the number of CPUs, then it forks a new
helper and resets the timer.

If a thread has been idle for more than 30 minutes, it exits.

Might that be reasonable?

Thanks,
NeilBrown

> ---
>  drivers/md/raid5.c |  118 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/md/raid5.h |    2 
>  2 files changed, 120 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: linux/drivers/md/raid5.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/drivers/md/raid5.c	2012-06-01 15:23:56.001992200 +0800
> +++ linux/drivers/md/raid5.c	2012-06-04 11:54:25.775331361 +0800
> @@ -4602,6 +4602,41 @@ static int __get_stripe_batch(struct r5c
>  	return batch->count;
>  }
>  
> +static void raid5auxd(struct mddev *mddev)
> +{
> +	struct r5conf *conf = mddev->private;
> +	struct blk_plug plug;
> +	struct stripe_head_batch batch;
> +	int handled, i;
> +
> +	pr_debug("+++ raid5auxd active\n");
> +
> +	blk_start_plug(&plug);
> +	handled = 0;
> +	spin_lock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
> +	while (1) {
> +		if (!__get_stripe_batch(conf, &batch))
> +			break;
> +		spin_unlock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
> +
> +		for (i = 0; i < batch.count; i++) {
> +			handled++;
> +			handle_stripe(batch.stripes[i]);
> +		}
> +
> +		release_stripe_flush_batch(&batch);
> +		cond_resched();
> +
> +		spin_lock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
> +	}
> +	pr_debug("%d stripes handled\n", handled);
> +
> +	spin_unlock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
> +	blk_finish_plug(&plug);
> +
> +	pr_debug("--- raid5auxd inactive\n");
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * This is our raid5 kernel thread.
>   *
> @@ -4651,6 +4686,8 @@ static void raid5d(struct mddev *mddev)
>  
>  		if (!__get_stripe_batch(conf, &batch))
>  			break;
> +		for (i = 0; i < conf->aux_thread_num; i++)
> +			md_wakeup_thread(conf->aux_threads[i]);
>  		spin_unlock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
>  
>  		for (i = 0; i < batch.count; i++) {
> @@ -4784,10 +4821,86 @@ stripe_cache_active_show(struct mddev *m
>  static struct md_sysfs_entry
>  raid5_stripecache_active = __ATTR_RO(stripe_cache_active);
>  
> +static ssize_t
> +raid5_show_auxthread_number(struct mddev *mddev, char *page)
> +{
> +	struct r5conf *conf = mddev->private;
> +	if (conf)
> +		return sprintf(page, "%d\n", conf->aux_thread_num);
> +	else
> +		return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static ssize_t
> +raid5_store_auxthread_number(struct mddev *mddev, const char *page, size_t len)
> +{
> +	struct r5conf *conf = mddev->private;
> +	unsigned long new;
> +	int i;
> +	struct md_thread **threads;
> +
> +	if (len >= PAGE_SIZE)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	if (!conf)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	if (strict_strtoul(page, 10, &new))
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (new == conf->aux_thread_num)
> +		return len;
> +
> +	if (new > conf->aux_thread_num) {
> +
> +		threads = kmalloc(sizeof(struct md_thread *) * new, GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (!threads)
> +			return -EFAULT;
> +
> +		i = conf->aux_thread_num;
> +		while (i < new) {
> +			char name[10];
> +
> +			sprintf(name, "aux%d", i);
> +			threads[i] = md_register_thread(raid5auxd, mddev, name);
> +			if (!threads[i])
> +				goto error;
> +			i++;
> +		}
> +		memcpy(threads, conf->aux_threads,
> +			sizeof(struct md_thread *) * conf->aux_thread_num);
> +		spin_lock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
> +		kfree(conf->aux_threads);
> +		conf->aux_threads = threads;
> +		conf->aux_thread_num = new;
> +		spin_unlock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
> +	} else {
> +		int old = conf->aux_thread_num;
> +
> +		spin_lock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
> +		conf->aux_thread_num = new;
> +		spin_unlock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
> +		for (i = new; i < old; i++)
> +			md_unregister_thread(&conf->aux_threads[i]);
> +	}
> +
> +	return len;
> +error:
> +	while (--i >= conf->aux_thread_num)
> +		md_unregister_thread(&threads[i]);
> +	kfree(threads);
> +	return -EFAULT;
> +}
> +
> +static struct md_sysfs_entry
> +raid5_auxthread_number = __ATTR(auxthread_number, S_IRUGO|S_IWUSR,
> +				raid5_show_auxthread_number,
> +				raid5_store_auxthread_number);
> +
>  static struct attribute *raid5_attrs[] =  {
>  	&raid5_stripecache_size.attr,
>  	&raid5_stripecache_active.attr,
>  	&raid5_preread_bypass_threshold.attr,
> +	&raid5_auxthread_number.attr,
>  	NULL,
>  };
>  static struct attribute_group raid5_attrs_group = {
> @@ -4835,6 +4948,7 @@ static void raid5_free_percpu(struct r5c
>  
>  static void free_conf(struct r5conf *conf)
>  {
> +	kfree(conf->aux_threads);
>  	shrink_stripes(conf);
>  	raid5_free_percpu(conf);
>  	kfree(conf->disks);
> @@ -5391,6 +5505,10 @@ abort:
>  static int stop(struct mddev *mddev)
>  {
>  	struct r5conf *conf = mddev->private;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < conf->aux_thread_num; i++)
> +		md_unregister_thread(&conf->aux_threads[i]);
>  
>  	md_unregister_thread(&mddev->thread);
>  	if (mddev->queue)
> Index: linux/drivers/md/raid5.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/drivers/md/raid5.h	2012-06-01 15:23:56.017991998 +0800
> +++ linux/drivers/md/raid5.h	2012-06-01 15:27:12.515521685 +0800
> @@ -463,6 +463,8 @@ struct r5conf {
>  	 * the new thread here until we fully activate the array.
>  	 */
>  	struct md_thread	*thread;
> +	int			aux_thread_num;
> +	struct md_thread	**aux_threads;
>  };
>  
>  /*

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Managing RAID on Linux]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device-Mapper]     [Kernel]     [Linux Books]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Photos]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Yosemite News]     [AMD 64]     [Linux Networking]

Add to Google Powered by Linux