Hyper-V storage driver, which switched to using virt_boundary some time
ago, experiences significant slowdown on non-page-aligned IO. E.g.
With virt_boundary set:
# time mkfs.ntfs -Q -s 512 /dev/sdc1
...
real 0m9.406s
user 0m0.014s
sys 0m0.672s
Without virt_boundary set (unsafe):
# time mkfs.ntfs -Q -s 512 /dev/sdc1
...
real 0m6.657s
user 0m0.012s
sys 0m6.423s
The reason of the slowdown is the fact that bios don't get merged and we
end up sending many short requests to the host. My investigation led me to
the following code (__bvec_gap_to_prev()):
return offset ||
((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
Here is an example: we have two bio_vec with the following content:
bprv.bv_offset = 512
bprv.bv_len = 512
bnxt.bv_offset = 1024
bnxt.bv_len = 512
bprv.bv_page == bnxt.bv_page
virt_boundary is set to PAGE_SIZE-1
The above mentioned code will report that a gap will appear if we merge
these two (as offset = 1024) but this doesn't look sane. On top of that,
we have the following optimization in bio_add_pc_page():
if (page == prev->bv_page &&
offset == prev->bv_offset + prev->bv_len) {
prev->bv_len += len;
bio->bi_iter.bi_size += len;
goto done;
}
But we don't have such check in other places, which check virt_boundary.
Modify the check in __bvec_gap_to_prev() to the following:
1) Report no gap in case bnxt->bv_offset == bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len
when bprv.bv_page == bnxt.bv_page.
2) Continue reporting no gap in (bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) &
queue_virt_boundary(q) case.
Reported-by: John R. Kozee II <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <[email protected]>
---
- The condition I'm changing was there since SG_GAPS so I may be missing
something important, thus RFC.
---
block/bio-integrity.c | 7 +++++--
block/bio.c | 4 +++-
block/blk-merge.c | 2 +-
include/linux/blkdev.h | 17 +++++++++--------
4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/bio-integrity.c b/block/bio-integrity.c
index 711e4d8d..f8560da 100644
--- a/block/bio-integrity.c
+++ b/block/bio-integrity.c
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ int bio_integrity_add_page(struct bio *bio, struct page *page,
unsigned int len, unsigned int offset)
{
struct bio_integrity_payload *bip = bio_integrity(bio);
- struct bio_vec *iv;
+ struct bio_vec *iv, bv;
if (bip->bip_vcnt >= bip->bip_max_vcnt) {
printk(KERN_ERR "%s: bip_vec full\n", __func__);
@@ -144,10 +144,13 @@ int bio_integrity_add_page(struct bio *bio, struct page *page,
}
iv = bip->bip_vec + bip->bip_vcnt;
+ bv.bv_page = page;
+ bv.bv_len = len;
+ bv.bv_offset = offset;
if (bip->bip_vcnt &&
bvec_gap_to_prev(bdev_get_queue(bio->bi_bdev),
- &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1], offset))
+ &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1], &bv))
return 0;
iv->bv_page = page;
diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
index cf75915..1583581 100644
--- a/block/bio.c
+++ b/block/bio.c
@@ -730,6 +730,8 @@ int bio_add_pc_page(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio, struct page
*/
if (bio->bi_vcnt > 0) {
struct bio_vec *prev = &bio->bi_io_vec[bio->bi_vcnt - 1];
+ struct bio_vec bv = {.bv_page = page, .bv_len = len,
+ .bv_offset = offset};
if (page == prev->bv_page &&
offset == prev->bv_offset + prev->bv_len) {
@@ -742,7 +744,7 @@ int bio_add_pc_page(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio, struct page
* If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
* offset would create a gap, disallow it.
*/
- if (bvec_gap_to_prev(q, prev, offset))
+ if (bvec_gap_to_prev(q, prev, &bv))
return 0;
}
diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
index 2613531..8c6c3e2 100644
--- a/block/blk-merge.c
+++ b/block/blk-merge.c
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ static struct bio *blk_bio_segment_split(struct request_queue *q,
* If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
* offset would create a gap, disallow it.
*/
- if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, bv.bv_offset))
+ if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, &bv))
goto split;
if (sectors + (bv.bv_len >> 9) > max_sectors) {
diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
index 413c84f..b4fa29d 100644
--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -1373,10 +1373,11 @@ static inline void put_dev_sector(Sector p)
}
static inline bool __bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
- struct bio_vec *bprv, unsigned int offset)
+ struct bio_vec *bprv, struct bio_vec *bnxt)
{
- return offset ||
- ((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
+ if (bprv->bv_page == bnxt->bv_page)
+ return bnxt->bv_offset != bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len;
+ return (bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q);
}
/*
@@ -1384,11 +1385,11 @@ static inline bool __bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
* the SG list. Most drivers don't care about this, but some do.
*/
static inline bool bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
- struct bio_vec *bprv, unsigned int offset)
+ struct bio_vec *bprv, struct bio_vec *bnxt)
{
if (!queue_virt_boundary(q))
return false;
- return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bprv, offset);
+ return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bprv, bnxt);
}
static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
@@ -1400,7 +1401,7 @@ static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
bio_get_last_bvec(prev, &pb);
bio_get_first_bvec(next, &nb);
- return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, nb.bv_offset);
+ return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, &nb);
}
return false;
@@ -1545,7 +1546,7 @@ static inline bool integrity_req_gap_back_merge(struct request *req,
struct bio_integrity_payload *bip_next = bio_integrity(next);
return bvec_gap_to_prev(req->q, &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1],
- bip_next->bip_vec[0].bv_offset);
+ &bip_next->bip_vec[0]);
}
static inline bool integrity_req_gap_front_merge(struct request *req,
@@ -1555,7 +1556,7 @@ static inline bool integrity_req_gap_front_merge(struct request *req,
struct bio_integrity_payload *bip_next = bio_integrity(req->bio);
return bvec_gap_to_prev(req->q, &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1],
- bip_next->bip_vec[0].bv_offset);
+ &bip_next->bip_vec[0]);
}
#else /* CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY */
--
2.5.0
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 04:17:56PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> The reason of the slowdown is the fact that bios don't get merged and we
> end up sending many short requests to the host. My investigation led me to
> the following code (__bvec_gap_to_prev()):
>
> return offset ||
> ((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
>
> Here is an example: we have two bio_vec with the following content:
> bprv.bv_offset = 512
> bprv.bv_len = 512
>
> bnxt.bv_offset = 1024
> bnxt.bv_len = 512
>
> bprv.bv_page == bnxt.bv_page
> virt_boundary is set to PAGE_SIZE-1
>
> The above mentioned code will report that a gap will appear if we merge
> these two (as offset = 1024) but this doesn't look sane. On top of that,
> we have the following optimization in bio_add_pc_page():
>
> if (page == prev->bv_page &&
> offset == prev->bv_offset + prev->bv_len) {
> prev->bv_len += len;
> bio->bi_iter.bi_size += len;
> goto done;
> }
This part sounds odd. Why is a filesystem using bio_add_pc_page? Shouldn't
these go through "bio_add_page" instead? That already has an optimization
to combine bio's within the same page.
Keith Busch <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 04:17:56PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> The reason of the slowdown is the fact that bios don't get merged and we
>> end up sending many short requests to the host. My investigation led me to
>> the following code (__bvec_gap_to_prev()):
>>
>> return offset ||
>> ((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
>>
>> Here is an example: we have two bio_vec with the following content:
>> bprv.bv_offset = 512
>> bprv.bv_len = 512
>>
>> bnxt.bv_offset = 1024
>> bnxt.bv_len = 512
>>
>> bprv.bv_page == bnxt.bv_page
>> virt_boundary is set to PAGE_SIZE-1
>>
>> The above mentioned code will report that a gap will appear if we merge
>> these two (as offset = 1024) but this doesn't look sane. On top of that,
>> we have the following optimization in bio_add_pc_page():
>>
>> if (page == prev->bv_page &&
>> offset == prev->bv_offset + prev->bv_len) {
>> prev->bv_len += len;
>> bio->bi_iter.bi_size += len;
>> goto done;
>> }
>
> This part sounds odd. Why is a filesystem using bio_add_pc_page? Shouldn't
> these go through "bio_add_page" instead? That already has an optimization
> to combine bio's within the same page.
Not sure I know enough to comment here and it is most probably unrelated
to the issue I'm seeing (bio_add_pc_page() doesn't pop up when I do
'mkfs.ntfs') but in this particular place I see same page check before
we do bvec_gap_to_prev() but there is no such check in other places and
bios in the same page are always being split:
return offset || ((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
will always return 'true' because offset is the offset of the second
bio. That's what I'm trying to address.
--
Vitaly
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Vitaly Kuznetsov <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hyper-V storage driver, which switched to using virt_boundary some time
> ago, experiences significant slowdown on non-page-aligned IO. E.g.
>
> With virt_boundary set:
> # time mkfs.ntfs -Q -s 512 /dev/sdc1
> ...
> real 0m9.406s
> user 0m0.014s
> sys 0m0.672s
>
> Without virt_boundary set (unsafe):
> # time mkfs.ntfs -Q -s 512 /dev/sdc1
> ...
> real 0m6.657s
> user 0m0.012s
> sys 0m6.423s
>
> The reason of the slowdown is the fact that bios don't get merged and we
> end up sending many short requests to the host. My investigation led me to
> the following code (__bvec_gap_to_prev()):
>
> return offset ||
> ((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
>
> Here is an example: we have two bio_vec with the following content:
> bprv.bv_offset = 512
> bprv.bv_len = 512
>
> bnxt.bv_offset = 1024
> bnxt.bv_len = 512
>
> bprv.bv_page == bnxt.bv_page
> virt_boundary is set to PAGE_SIZE-1
>
> The above mentioned code will report that a gap will appear if we merge
> these two (as offset = 1024) but this doesn't look sane. On top of that,
> we have the following optimization in bio_add_pc_page():
>
> if (page == prev->bv_page &&
> offset == prev->bv_offset + prev->bv_len) {
> prev->bv_len += len;
> bio->bi_iter.bi_size += len;
> goto done;
> }
>
> But we don't have such check in other places, which check virt_boundary.
We do have the above merge in bio_add_page(), so the two bios in
your above example shouldn't have been observed if the two buffers
are added to bio via the bio_add_page().
If you see short bios in above example, maybe you need to check ntfs code:
- if bio_add_page() is used to add buffer
- if using one standalone bio to transfer each 512byte, even they
are in same page and the sector is continuous
> Modify the check in __bvec_gap_to_prev() to the following:
> 1) Report no gap in case bnxt->bv_offset == bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len
> when bprv.bv_page == bnxt.bv_page.
> 2) Continue reporting no gap in (bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) &
> queue_virt_boundary(q) case.
>
> Reported-by: John R. Kozee II <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <[email protected]>
> ---
> - The condition I'm changing was there since SG_GAPS so I may be missing
> something important, thus RFC.
> ---
> block/bio-integrity.c | 7 +++++--
> block/bio.c | 4 +++-
> block/blk-merge.c | 2 +-
> include/linux/blkdev.h | 17 +++++++++--------
> 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/bio-integrity.c b/block/bio-integrity.c
> index 711e4d8d..f8560da 100644
> --- a/block/bio-integrity.c
> +++ b/block/bio-integrity.c
> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ int bio_integrity_add_page(struct bio *bio, struct page *page,
> unsigned int len, unsigned int offset)
> {
> struct bio_integrity_payload *bip = bio_integrity(bio);
> - struct bio_vec *iv;
> + struct bio_vec *iv, bv;
>
> if (bip->bip_vcnt >= bip->bip_max_vcnt) {
> printk(KERN_ERR "%s: bip_vec full\n", __func__);
> @@ -144,10 +144,13 @@ int bio_integrity_add_page(struct bio *bio, struct page *page,
> }
>
> iv = bip->bip_vec + bip->bip_vcnt;
> + bv.bv_page = page;
> + bv.bv_len = len;
> + bv.bv_offset = offset;
>
> if (bip->bip_vcnt &&
> bvec_gap_to_prev(bdev_get_queue(bio->bi_bdev),
> - &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1], offset))
> + &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1], &bv))
> return 0;
>
> iv->bv_page = page;
> diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
> index cf75915..1583581 100644
> --- a/block/bio.c
> +++ b/block/bio.c
> @@ -730,6 +730,8 @@ int bio_add_pc_page(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio, struct page
> */
> if (bio->bi_vcnt > 0) {
> struct bio_vec *prev = &bio->bi_io_vec[bio->bi_vcnt - 1];
> + struct bio_vec bv = {.bv_page = page, .bv_len = len,
> + .bv_offset = offset};
>
> if (page == prev->bv_page &&
> offset == prev->bv_offset + prev->bv_len) {
> @@ -742,7 +744,7 @@ int bio_add_pc_page(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio, struct page
> * If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
> * offset would create a gap, disallow it.
> */
> - if (bvec_gap_to_prev(q, prev, offset))
> + if (bvec_gap_to_prev(q, prev, &bv))
> return 0;
> }
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
> index 2613531..8c6c3e2 100644
> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
> @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ static struct bio *blk_bio_segment_split(struct request_queue *q,
> * If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
> * offset would create a gap, disallow it.
> */
> - if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, bv.bv_offset))
> + if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, &bv))
> goto split;
>
> if (sectors + (bv.bv_len >> 9) > max_sectors) {
> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> index 413c84f..b4fa29d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> @@ -1373,10 +1373,11 @@ static inline void put_dev_sector(Sector p)
> }
>
> static inline bool __bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
> - struct bio_vec *bprv, unsigned int offset)
> + struct bio_vec *bprv, struct bio_vec *bnxt)
> {
> - return offset ||
> - ((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
> + if (bprv->bv_page == bnxt->bv_page)
> + return bnxt->bv_offset != bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len;
> + return (bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q);
Why do you remove check on 'offset'?
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -1384,11 +1385,11 @@ static inline bool __bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
> * the SG list. Most drivers don't care about this, but some do.
> */
> static inline bool bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
> - struct bio_vec *bprv, unsigned int offset)
> + struct bio_vec *bprv, struct bio_vec *bnxt)
> {
> if (!queue_virt_boundary(q))
> return false;
> - return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bprv, offset);
> + return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bprv, bnxt);
> }
>
> static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
> @@ -1400,7 +1401,7 @@ static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
> bio_get_last_bvec(prev, &pb);
> bio_get_first_bvec(next, &nb);
>
> - return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, nb.bv_offset);
> + return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, &nb);
> }
>
> return false;
> @@ -1545,7 +1546,7 @@ static inline bool integrity_req_gap_back_merge(struct request *req,
> struct bio_integrity_payload *bip_next = bio_integrity(next);
>
> return bvec_gap_to_prev(req->q, &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1],
> - bip_next->bip_vec[0].bv_offset);
> + &bip_next->bip_vec[0]);
> }
>
> static inline bool integrity_req_gap_front_merge(struct request *req,
> @@ -1555,7 +1556,7 @@ static inline bool integrity_req_gap_front_merge(struct request *req,
> struct bio_integrity_payload *bip_next = bio_integrity(req->bio);
>
> return bvec_gap_to_prev(req->q, &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1],
> - bip_next->bip_vec[0].bv_offset);
> + &bip_next->bip_vec[0]);
> }
>
> #else /* CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY */
> --
> 2.5.0
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Ming Lei
Ming Lei <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Vitaly Kuznetsov <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hyper-V storage driver, which switched to using virt_boundary some time
>> ago, experiences significant slowdown on non-page-aligned IO. E.g.
>>
>> With virt_boundary set:
>> # time mkfs.ntfs -Q -s 512 /dev/sdc1
>> ...
>> real 0m9.406s
>> user 0m0.014s
>> sys 0m0.672s
>>
>> Without virt_boundary set (unsafe):
>> # time mkfs.ntfs -Q -s 512 /dev/sdc1
>> ...
>> real 0m6.657s
>> user 0m0.012s
>> sys 0m6.423s
>>
>> The reason of the slowdown is the fact that bios don't get merged and we
>> end up sending many short requests to the host. My investigation led me to
>> the following code (__bvec_gap_to_prev()):
>>
>> return offset ||
>> ((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
>>
>> Here is an example: we have two bio_vec with the following content:
>> bprv.bv_offset = 512
>> bprv.bv_len = 512
>>
>> bnxt.bv_offset = 1024
>> bnxt.bv_len = 512
>>
>> bprv.bv_page == bnxt.bv_page
>> virt_boundary is set to PAGE_SIZE-1
>>
>> The above mentioned code will report that a gap will appear if we merge
>> these two (as offset = 1024) but this doesn't look sane. On top of that,
>> we have the following optimization in bio_add_pc_page():
>>
>> if (page == prev->bv_page &&
>> offset == prev->bv_offset + prev->bv_len) {
>> prev->bv_len += len;
>> bio->bi_iter.bi_size += len;
>> goto done;
>> }
>>
>> But we don't have such check in other places, which check virt_boundary.
>
> We do have the above merge in bio_add_page(), so the two bios in
> your above example shouldn't have been observed if the two buffers
> are added to bio via the bio_add_page().
>
> If you see short bios in above example, maybe you need to check ntfs code:
>
> - if bio_add_page() is used to add buffer
> - if using one standalone bio to transfer each 512byte, even they
> are in same page and the sector is continuous
I'm not using ntfs, mkfs.ntfs is a userspace application which shows the
regression when virt_boundary is in place. I should have avoided
mentioning bio_add_pc_page() here as it is unrelated to the issue.
In particular, I'm concearned about the following call sites:
blk_bio_segment_split()
ll_back_merge_fn()
ll_front_merge_fn()
>> Modify the check in __bvec_gap_to_prev() to the following:
>> 1) Report no gap in case bnxt->bv_offset == bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len
>> when bprv.bv_page == bnxt.bv_page.
>> 2) Continue reporting no gap in (bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) &
>> queue_virt_boundary(q) case.
>>
>> Reported-by: John R. Kozee II <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> - The condition I'm changing was there since SG_GAPS so I may be missing
>> something important, thus RFC.
>> ---
>> block/bio-integrity.c | 7 +++++--
>> block/bio.c | 4 +++-
>> block/blk-merge.c | 2 +-
>> include/linux/blkdev.h | 17 +++++++++--------
>> 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/bio-integrity.c b/block/bio-integrity.c
>> index 711e4d8d..f8560da 100644
>> --- a/block/bio-integrity.c
>> +++ b/block/bio-integrity.c
>> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ int bio_integrity_add_page(struct bio *bio, struct page *page,
>> unsigned int len, unsigned int offset)
>> {
>> struct bio_integrity_payload *bip = bio_integrity(bio);
>> - struct bio_vec *iv;
>> + struct bio_vec *iv, bv;
>>
>> if (bip->bip_vcnt >= bip->bip_max_vcnt) {
>> printk(KERN_ERR "%s: bip_vec full\n", __func__);
>> @@ -144,10 +144,13 @@ int bio_integrity_add_page(struct bio *bio, struct page *page,
>> }
>>
>> iv = bip->bip_vec + bip->bip_vcnt;
>> + bv.bv_page = page;
>> + bv.bv_len = len;
>> + bv.bv_offset = offset;
>>
>> if (bip->bip_vcnt &&
>> bvec_gap_to_prev(bdev_get_queue(bio->bi_bdev),
>> - &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1], offset))
>> + &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1], &bv))
>> return 0;
>>
>> iv->bv_page = page;
>> diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
>> index cf75915..1583581 100644
>> --- a/block/bio.c
>> +++ b/block/bio.c
>> @@ -730,6 +730,8 @@ int bio_add_pc_page(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio, struct page
>> */
>> if (bio->bi_vcnt > 0) {
>> struct bio_vec *prev = &bio->bi_io_vec[bio->bi_vcnt - 1];
>> + struct bio_vec bv = {.bv_page = page, .bv_len = len,
>> + .bv_offset = offset};
>>
>> if (page == prev->bv_page &&
>> offset == prev->bv_offset + prev->bv_len) {
>> @@ -742,7 +744,7 @@ int bio_add_pc_page(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio, struct page
>> * If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
>> * offset would create a gap, disallow it.
>> */
>> - if (bvec_gap_to_prev(q, prev, offset))
>> + if (bvec_gap_to_prev(q, prev, &bv))
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
>> index 2613531..8c6c3e2 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
>> @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ static struct bio *blk_bio_segment_split(struct request_queue *q,
>> * If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
>> * offset would create a gap, disallow it.
>> */
>> - if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, bv.bv_offset))
>> + if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, &bv))
>> goto split;
>>
>> if (sectors + (bv.bv_len >> 9) > max_sectors) {
>> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
>> index 413c84f..b4fa29d 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
>> @@ -1373,10 +1373,11 @@ static inline void put_dev_sector(Sector p)
>> }
>>
>> static inline bool __bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
>> - struct bio_vec *bprv, unsigned int offset)
>> + struct bio_vec *bprv, struct bio_vec *bnxt)
>> {
>> - return offset ||
>> - ((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
>> + if (bprv->bv_page == bnxt->bv_page)
>> + return bnxt->bv_offset != bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len;
>> + return (bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q);
>
> Why do you remove check on 'offset'?
>
Because this check is wrong in my opinion and that's what's causing the
issue.
Let me try to give my example again.
We have two bios,
bprv.bv_offset = 512
bprv.bv_len = 512
bnxt.bv_offset = 1024
bnxt.bv_len = 512
bprv.bv_page == bnxt.bv_page
virt_boundary is set to PAGE_SIZE-1
we call __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &bprv, bnxt.offset) and 'offset' check
will report that a gap will appear if we merge these two bios. This
seems wrong.
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -1384,11 +1385,11 @@ static inline bool __bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
>> * the SG list. Most drivers don't care about this, but some do.
>> */
>> static inline bool bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
>> - struct bio_vec *bprv, unsigned int offset)
>> + struct bio_vec *bprv, struct bio_vec *bnxt)
>> {
>> if (!queue_virt_boundary(q))
>> return false;
>> - return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bprv, offset);
>> + return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bprv, bnxt);
>> }
>>
>> static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
>> @@ -1400,7 +1401,7 @@ static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
>> bio_get_last_bvec(prev, &pb);
>> bio_get_first_bvec(next, &nb);
>>
>> - return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, nb.bv_offset);
>> + return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, &nb);
>> }
>>
>> return false;
>> @@ -1545,7 +1546,7 @@ static inline bool integrity_req_gap_back_merge(struct request *req,
>> struct bio_integrity_payload *bip_next = bio_integrity(next);
>>
>> return bvec_gap_to_prev(req->q, &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1],
>> - bip_next->bip_vec[0].bv_offset);
>> + &bip_next->bip_vec[0]);
>> }
>>
>> static inline bool integrity_req_gap_front_merge(struct request *req,
>> @@ -1555,7 +1556,7 @@ static inline bool integrity_req_gap_front_merge(struct request *req,
>> struct bio_integrity_payload *bip_next = bio_integrity(req->bio);
>>
>> return bvec_gap_to_prev(req->q, &bip->bip_vec[bip->bip_vcnt - 1],
>> - bip_next->bip_vec[0].bv_offset);
>> + &bip_next->bip_vec[0]);
>> }
>>
>> #else /* CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY */
>> --
>> 2.5.0
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
>> the body of a message to [email protected]
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Vitaly
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 05:26:28PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Ming Lei <[email protected]> writes:
> > We do have the above merge in bio_add_page(), so the two bios in
> > your above example shouldn't have been observed if the two buffers
> > are added to bio via the bio_add_page().
> >
> > If you see short bios in above example, maybe you need to check ntfs code:
> >
> > - if bio_add_page() is used to add buffer
> > - if using one standalone bio to transfer each 512byte, even they
> > are in same page and the sector is continuous
>
> I'm not using ntfs, mkfs.ntfs is a userspace application which shows the
> regression when virt_boundary is in place. I should have avoided
> mentioning bio_add_pc_page() here as it is unrelated to the issue.
>
> In particular, I'm concearned about the following call sites:
> blk_bio_segment_split()
> ll_back_merge_fn()
> ll_front_merge_fn()
I don't think blk_bio_segment_split would have seen such a bio vector
if it pages were added with bio_add_page. Those should already have
been combined. In any case, I think you can get what you're after just
by moving the gap check after BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGABLE. Does the following
look ok to you?
---
diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
index 2613531..4aa8e44 100644
--- a/block/blk-merge.c
+++ b/block/blk-merge.c
@@ -96,13 +96,6 @@ static struct bio *blk_bio_segment_split(struct request_queue *q,
const unsigned max_sectors = get_max_io_size(q, bio);
bio_for_each_segment(bv, bio, iter) {
- /*
- * If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
- * offset would create a gap, disallow it.
- */
- if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, bv.bv_offset))
- goto split;
-
if (sectors + (bv.bv_len >> 9) > max_sectors) {
/*
* Consider this a new segment if we're splitting in
@@ -139,6 +132,13 @@ new_segment:
if (nsegs == queue_max_segments(q))
goto split;
+ /*
+ * If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
+ * offset would create a gap, disallow it.
+ */
+ if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, bv.bv_offset))
+ goto split;
+
nsegs++;
bvprv = bv;
bvprvp = &bvprv;
diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
index 413c84f..69cffbe 100644
--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -1400,7 +1400,8 @@ static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
bio_get_last_bvec(prev, &pb);
bio_get_first_bvec(next, &nb);
- return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, nb.bv_offset);
+ if (!BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE(&pb, &nb))
+ return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, nb.bv_offset);
}
return false;
--
Keith Busch <[email protected]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 05:26:28PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Ming Lei <[email protected]> writes:
>> > We do have the above merge in bio_add_page(), so the two bios in
>> > your above example shouldn't have been observed if the two buffers
>> > are added to bio via the bio_add_page().
>> >
>> > If you see short bios in above example, maybe you need to check ntfs code:
>> >
>> > - if bio_add_page() is used to add buffer
>> > - if using one standalone bio to transfer each 512byte, even they
>> > are in same page and the sector is continuous
>>
>> I'm not using ntfs, mkfs.ntfs is a userspace application which shows the
>> regression when virt_boundary is in place. I should have avoided
>> mentioning bio_add_pc_page() here as it is unrelated to the issue.
>>
>> In particular, I'm concearned about the following call sites:
>> blk_bio_segment_split()
>> ll_back_merge_fn()
>> ll_front_merge_fn()
>
> I don't think blk_bio_segment_split would have seen such a bio vector
> if it pages were added with bio_add_page. Those should already have
> been combined. In any case, I think you can get what you're after just
> by moving the gap check after BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGABLE. Does the following
> look ok to you?
>
Thanks, it does.
Just tested against 4.5, the test was:
# time mkfs.ntfs -s 512 -Q /dev/sdc1
The results are:
non-patched kernel:
real 0m35.552s
user 0m0.006s
sys 0m28.316s
my patch:
real 0m6.277s
user 0m0.010s
sys 0m5.870s
your patch:
real 0m4.247s
user 0m0.005s
sys 0m4.136s
Will you send it or would you like me to do that with your Suggested-by?
(a nitpick below)
> ---
> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
> index 2613531..4aa8e44 100644
> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
> @@ -96,13 +96,6 @@ static struct bio *blk_bio_segment_split(struct request_queue *q,
> const unsigned max_sectors = get_max_io_size(q, bio);
>
> bio_for_each_segment(bv, bio, iter) {
> - /*
> - * If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
> - * offset would create a gap, disallow it.
> - */
> - if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, bv.bv_offset))
> - goto split;
> -
> if (sectors + (bv.bv_len >> 9) > max_sectors) {
> /*
> * Consider this a new segment if we're splitting in
> @@ -139,6 +132,13 @@ new_segment:
> if (nsegs == queue_max_segments(q))
> goto split;
>
> + /*
> + * If the queue doesn't support SG gaps and adding this
> + * offset would create a gap, disallow it.
> + */
> + if (bvprvp && bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bvprvp, bv.bv_offset))
> + goto split;
> +
> nsegs++;
> bvprv = bv;
> bvprvp = &bvprv;
> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> index 413c84f..69cffbe 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> @@ -1400,7 +1400,8 @@ static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
> bio_get_last_bvec(prev, &pb);
> bio_get_first_bvec(next, &nb);
>
> - return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, nb.bv_offset);
> + if (!BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE(&pb, &nb))
> + return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, nb.bv_offset);
> }
Any reason to put this check here and not move to __bvec_gap_to_prev()?
I find it misleading that __bvec_gap_to_prev() reports a gap when offset
!= 0 not checking BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE().
>
> return false;
> --
--
Vitaly
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:20:28PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Keith Busch <[email protected]> writes:
> > been combined. In any case, I think you can get what you're after just
> > by moving the gap check after BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGABLE. Does the following
> > look ok to you?
> >
>
> Thanks, it does.
Cool, thanks for confirming.
> Will you send it or would you like me to do that with your Suggested-by?
I'm not confident yet this doesn't break anything, particularly since
we moved the gap check after the length check. Just wanted to confirm
the concept addressed your concern, but still need to take a closer look
and test before submitting.
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Keith Busch <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:20:28PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Keith Busch <[email protected]> writes:
>> > been combined. In any case, I think you can get what you're after just
>> > by moving the gap check after BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGABLE. Does the following
>> > look ok to you?
>> >
>>
>> Thanks, it does.
>
> Cool, thanks for confirming.
>
>> Will you send it or would you like me to do that with your Suggested-by?
>
> I'm not confident yet this doesn't break anything, particularly since
> we moved the gap check after the length check. Just wanted to confirm
> the concept addressed your concern, but still need to take a closer look
> and test before submitting.
IMO, the change on blk_bio_segment_split() is correct, because actually it
is a sg gap and the check should have been done between segments
instead of bvecs. So it is reasonable to move the check just before populating
a new segment.
But for the 2nd change in bio_will_gap(), which should fix Vitaly's problem, I
am still not sure if it is completely correct. bio_will_gap() is used
to check if two
bios may be merged. Suppose two bios are continues physically, the last bvec
in 1st bio and the first bvec in 2nd bio might not be in one same segment
because of segment size limit.
The root cause might be from blkdev_writepage(), and I guess these small
bios are from there.
thanks,
Ming Lei
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Ming Lei <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Keith Busch <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:20:28PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>>> Keith Busch <[email protected]> writes:
>>> > been combined. In any case, I think you can get what you're after just
>>> > by moving the gap check after BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGABLE. Does the following
>>> > look ok to you?
>>> >
>>>
>>> Thanks, it does.
>>
>> Cool, thanks for confirming.
>>
>>> Will you send it or would you like me to do that with your Suggested-by?
>>
>> I'm not confident yet this doesn't break anything, particularly since
>> we moved the gap check after the length check. Just wanted to confirm
>> the concept addressed your concern, but still need to take a closer look
>> and test before submitting.
>
> IMO, the change on blk_bio_segment_split() is correct, because actually it
> is a sg gap and the check should have been done between segments
> instead of bvecs. So it is reasonable to move the check just before populating
> a new segment.
Thinking of the 1st part change further, looks it is just correct in concept,
but wrong from current implementation. Because of bios/reqs merge,
blk_rq_map_sg() may end one segment in any bvec in theroy, so I guess
that is why each non-1st bvec need the check to make sure no sg gap.
Looks a very crazy limit, :-)
>
> But for the 2nd change in bio_will_gap(), which should fix Vitaly's problem, I
> am still not sure if it is completely correct. bio_will_gap() is used
> to check if two
> bios may be merged. Suppose two bios are continues physically, the last bvec
> in 1st bio and the first bvec in 2nd bio might not be in one same segment
> because of segment size limit.
How about the attached patch?
>
> The root cause might be from blkdev_writepage(), and I guess these small
> bios are from there.
>
> thanks,
> Ming Lei
--
Ming Lei
Ming Lei <[email protected]> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Ming Lei <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Keith Busch <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:20:28PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>>>> Keith Busch <[email protected]> writes:
>>>> > been combined. In any case, I think you can get what you're after just
>>>> > by moving the gap check after BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGABLE. Does the following
>>>> > look ok to you?
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, it does.
>>>
>>> Cool, thanks for confirming.
>>>
>>>> Will you send it or would you like me to do that with your Suggested-by?
>>>
>>> I'm not confident yet this doesn't break anything, particularly since
>>> we moved the gap check after the length check. Just wanted to confirm
>>> the concept addressed your concern, but still need to take a closer look
>>> and test before submitting.
>>
>> IMO, the change on blk_bio_segment_split() is correct, because actually it
>> is a sg gap and the check should have been done between segments
>> instead of bvecs. So it is reasonable to move the check just before populating
>> a new segment.
>
> Thinking of the 1st part change further, looks it is just correct in concept,
> but wrong from current implementation. Because of bios/reqs merge,
> blk_rq_map_sg() may end one segment in any bvec in theroy, so I guess
> that is why each non-1st bvec need the check to make sure no sg gap.
> Looks a very crazy limit, :-)
>
>>
>> But for the 2nd change in bio_will_gap(), which should fix Vitaly's problem, I
>> am still not sure if it is completely correct. bio_will_gap() is used
>> to check if two
>> bios may be merged. Suppose two bios are continues physically, the last bvec
>> in 1st bio and the first bvec in 2nd bio might not be in one same segment
>> because of segment size limit.
>
> How about the attached patch?
>
I just wanted to revive the discussion as the issue persists. I
re-tested your patch against 4.6-rc4 and it efficiently solves the
issue.
pre-patch:
# time mkfs.ntfs /dev/sdb1
Cluster size has been automatically set to 4096 bytes.
Initializing device with zeroes: 100% - Done.
Creating NTFS volume structures.
mkntfs completed successfully. Have a nice day.
real8m10.977s
user0m0.115s
sys0m12.672s
post-patch:
# time mkfs.ntfs /dev/sdb1
Cluster size has been automatically set to 4096 bytes.
Initializing device with zeroes: 100% - Done.
Creating NTFS volume structures.
mkntfs completed successfully. Have a nice day.
real0m42.430s
user0m0.171s
sys0m7.675s
Will you send this patch? Please let me know if I can further
assist. Thanks!
--
Vitaly
> From: [email protected] [mailto:linux-kernel-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Vitaly Kuznetsov
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 21:48
> To: Ming Lei <[email protected]>
> Cc: Keith Busch <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Linux
> Kernel Mailing List <[email protected]>; Jens Axboe
> <[email protected]>; Dan Williams <[email protected]>; Martin K.
> Petersen <[email protected]>; Sagi Grimberg
> <[email protected]>; Mike Snitzer <[email protected]>; KY Srinivasan
> <[email protected]>; Cathy Avery <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] block: fix bio merge checks when virt_boundary is set
>
> Ming Lei <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Ming Lei <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Keith Busch <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:20:28PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> >>>> Keith Busch <[email protected]> writes:
> >>>> > been combined. In any case, I think you can get what you're after just
> >>>> > by moving the gap check after BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGABLE. Does the
> following
> >>>> > look ok to you?
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks, it does.
> >>>
> >>> Cool, thanks for confirming.
> >>>
> >>>> Will you send it or would you like me to do that with your Suggested-by?
> >>>
> >>> I'm not confident yet this doesn't break anything, particularly since
> >>> we moved the gap check after the length check. Just wanted to confirm
> >>> the concept addressed your concern, but still need to take a closer look
> >>> and test before submitting.
> >>
> >> IMO, the change on blk_bio_segment_split() is correct, because actually it
> >> is a sg gap and the check should have been done between segments
> >> instead of bvecs. So it is reasonable to move the check just before populating
> >> a new segment.
> >
> > Thinking of the 1st part change further, looks it is just correct in concept,
> > but wrong from current implementation. Because of bios/reqs merge,
> > blk_rq_map_sg() may end one segment in any bvec in theroy, so I guess
> > that is why each non-1st bvec need the check to make sure no sg gap.
> > Looks a very crazy limit, :-)
> >
> >>
> >> But for the 2nd change in bio_will_gap(), which should fix Vitaly's problem, I
> >> am still not sure if it is completely correct. bio_will_gap() is used
> >> to check if two
> >> bios may be merged. Suppose two bios are continues physically, the last bvec
> >> in 1st bio and the first bvec in 2nd bio might not be in one same segment
> >> because of segment size limit.
> >
> > How about the attached patch?
> >
>
> I just wanted to revive the discussion as the issue persists. I
> re-tested your patch against 4.6-rc4 and it efficiently solves the
> issue.
>
> pre-patch:
> # time mkfs.ntfs /dev/sdb1
> Cluster size has been automatically set to 4096 bytes.
> Initializing device with zeroes: 100% - Done.
> Creating NTFS volume structures.
> mkntfs completed successfully. Have a nice day.
>
> real8m10.977s
> user0m0.115s
> sys0m12.672s
>
> post-patch:
> # time mkfs.ntfs /dev/sdb1
> Cluster size has been automatically set to 4096 bytes.
> Initializing device with zeroes: 100% - Done.
> Creating NTFS volume structures.
> mkntfs completed successfully. Have a nice day.
>
> real0m42.430s
> user0m0.171s
> sys0m7.675s
>
> Will you send this patch? Please let me know if I can further
> assist. Thanks!
>
> --
> Vitaly
Hi, I'm reviving the thread because I'm suffering from exactly the same issue.
This is the thread I created today:
"Big I/O requests are split into small ones due to unaligned ext4 partition boundary?"
http://marc.info/?t=148180346100002&r=1&w=2
Ming's patch can fix this issue for me.
Stable 4.4 and later are affected too.
I didn't check 4.3.x kernels, but for Linux guest on Hyper-V, any kernel with the
patch "storvsc: get rid of bounce buffer"
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=81988a0e6b031bc80da15257201810ddcf989e64
should be affected.
Thanks,
-- Dexuan