Re: [PATCH 10/19] btrfs: calculate discard delay based on number of extents

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

 



On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 11:41:33AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 04:17:41PM -0400, Dennis Zhou wrote:
> > Use the number of discardable extents to help guide our discard delay
> > interval. This value is reevaluated every transaction commit.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dennis Zhou <dennis@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  fs/btrfs/ctree.h       |  2 ++
> >  fs/btrfs/discard.c     | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >  fs/btrfs/discard.h     |  3 +++
> >  fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c |  4 +++-
> >  fs/btrfs/sysfs.c       | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  5 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> > index 8479ab037812..b0823961d049 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> > @@ -449,6 +449,8 @@ struct btrfs_discard_ctl {
> >  	struct list_head discard_list[BTRFS_NR_DISCARD_LISTS];
> >  	atomic_t discard_extents;
> >  	atomic64_t discardable_bytes;
> > +	atomic_t delay;
> > +	atomic_t iops_limit;
> >  };
> >  
> >  /* delayed seq elem */
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/discard.c b/fs/btrfs/discard.c
> > index 75a2ff14b3c0..c7afb5f8240d 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/discard.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/discard.c
> > @@ -15,6 +15,11 @@
> >  
> >  #define BTRFS_DISCARD_DELAY		(300ULL * NSEC_PER_SEC)
> >  
> > +/* target discard delay in milliseconds */
> > +#define BTRFS_DISCARD_TARGET_MSEC	(6 * 60 * 60ULL * MSEC_PER_SEC)
> > +#define BTRFS_DISCARD_MAX_DELAY		(10000UL)
> > +#define BTRFS_DISCARD_MAX_IOPS		(10UL)
> > +
> >  static struct list_head *
> >  btrfs_get_discard_list(struct btrfs_discard_ctl *discard_ctl,
> >  		       struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache)
> > @@ -170,10 +175,12 @@ void btrfs_discard_schedule_work(struct btrfs_discard_ctl *discard_ctl,
> >  
> >  	cache = find_next_cache(discard_ctl, now);
> >  	if (cache) {
> > -		u64 delay = 0;
> > +		u64 delay = atomic_read(&discard_ctl->delay);
> >  
> >  		if (now < cache->discard_delay)
> > -			delay = nsecs_to_jiffies(cache->discard_delay - now);
> > +			delay = max_t(u64, delay,
> > +				      nsecs_to_jiffies(cache->discard_delay -
> > +						       now));
> 
> Small nit, instead
> 
> 			delay = nsecs_to_jiffies(cache->discard_delay - now);
> 			delay = max_t(u64, delay,
> 				      atomic_read(&discard_ctl->delay);
> 
> Looks a little cleaner.  Otherwise

Hmmm. Does that work if now > cache->discard_delay? I'm just worried
about the max_t with type u64.

> 
> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Josef

Thanks,
Dennis



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux