Received: by 2002:a6b:fb09:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id h9csp109945iog; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 20:46:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxUuvxyi28nj44hJVTB1ySeBm7MrhOAOvh6deMkSltJJrrq6vs9Ks6M1VToZ0En79s9tw6/ X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:7811:b0:6ef:a896:b407 with SMTP id la17-20020a170907781100b006efa896b407mr49752505ejc.645.1655091973422; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 20:46:13 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1655091973; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=LCMpDes0WXoyVTH3MWJWVwinSr53FJPd7P+9DfOMC9cRRVRbmBZeAK9YVjrIQgHVY4 +1o2Ntdh+EzKVV0kYCsa4OW9A9TMeXNeTSrErF5pIYKPozM0mKTJpX+EfCsKM1s2OJTR LgDbcWZKRRNqzPYpoBFD+aw7PWj/7f4Ozm6lnRLRa1gNFzRBRUJ0McpYlmdbuKxBfJcP os3pHKdfRPwFsRRa2TjPKDcbkLLx0n2P72eG54xm9XUeChBgE5gLgUAzs0TavxwlB2i5 j4gwT3E17W4f9C3QDZCfvi6zvtrhm5Cit+LM+4Sn2dt9tUTyAyh1gTwRKr3rXcTIr7eO ixRw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=YgK1P4DnNw03xrma17RflN05RYina1qu+Lfry/mE4p0=; b=y/B5qruIJEt0o7z7KexSXtbaGK6OLN7/KxYWDwK5KXop+lHPQYZtZMB/nsPRzkeyYx R2h2LJnpWsPEZzwON9Wuy+wnorypCrNoRIcY1B8bjgghaI2a99R08kMZIDgCOO5w6cNB CcShdtSnwPT51vSD9Bk+EC8d3CBZkS8ZDRzussBg5wrOGrcIuAfetzz68c47+YEFMJ2W AM3sTgX+GLBdio+ajhABL8Uz3AhQRHOpytm9kFYH/rWVK5T2pIuc6tFLLQ9LoRemyp9X 6+aDJbMZbdXovzR9Xqatyyn1gwJJZHwWgnJERDo4RwBeH2eMrmJHpmuAS/V3s5Rpw4xb njGg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=SQm8Igtn; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y4-20020aa7ccc4000000b0042e18e5eb66si6445951edt.536.2022.06.12.20.45.45; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 20:46:13 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=SQm8Igtn; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232391AbiFMBg6 (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 12 Jun 2022 21:36:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52336 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229682AbiFMBg4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jun 2022 21:36:56 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x42c.google.com (mail-pf1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FE1719E for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 18:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id x4so4475110pfj.10 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 18:36:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=YgK1P4DnNw03xrma17RflN05RYina1qu+Lfry/mE4p0=; b=SQm8IgtngUd3X6rpwGRQDpf1E8DFnr+h6Czci9SQB0sLh22/YezNBzbHhzEhytHi7i OhxeJ5Mvm7BLcKi+qJ5ZSwKc7WswfGDvrqQ7xSq98NmtRCLtN3FIZB0+b4AWDXoRIGGm CLfI5rHO/yB0Zt59fxuVtnKLNHAzZGOzC5HaOETm4ddEQepWXic4w8lRqDLQXbMJs4I/ zPX72TYpOr4oSXcVPgR2xXUPAQ/uPSA9UmQE47Q29iVAhUals0EX0CBp+wMRCkJ+Kh2U qTm1cACr0LMiqH5EDOW3HMRp1+jjwjqjUjN+VjSKjvxs7+h7yYGOw89e9nLZ+PAjQYgr ouJg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=YgK1P4DnNw03xrma17RflN05RYina1qu+Lfry/mE4p0=; b=FZZleuVW2eZ11iyGo5j6dWiVrx2DQ6DOZhCAyPZ7+H2MDKEvxCbJHc34NzooSHaQ9J cITePKsWmTghj0nbbiUqcoHQMQh4F1K7YcgUBdV5NXukUiU8Gl95A5liE9znvmkRiHRx P4COuNYEYNQsIlGo/5xTBNowJpySjJJnzpu2XcR93WRlpvbRu7QDhjP6AwlPtF1KfQr0 Es2QCxuEDrttGglVkGMwGS+MG3MapI28snAMpCrPLW/YOotGZl+gtDmdYvuRO1yXReQz L0ReK1dzmJl0s8hPXfnGPvbA2I9RAzfoZ9nDBQopQNrWGWHpzQWAng8naMDc7+RL7PJf 85Vg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531MXIbC/rG33LlGIR5QmGXAY1lKERZcvOgafB434MWWgQgHVT1M 9Sy7/sbosi/RsvhYvPULwh2DHi46axf6vuB/EGw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:244a:b0:4fa:ebf9:75de with SMTP id d10-20020a056a00244a00b004faebf975demr57514716pfj.73.1655084214692; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 18:36:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220606150305.1883410-1-hsinyi@chromium.org> <20220606150305.1883410-4-hsinyi@chromium.org> In-Reply-To: From: Xiongwei Song Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 09:36:28 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] squashfs: implement readahead To: Phillip Lougher Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang , Matthew Wilcox , Xiongwei Song , Marek Szyprowski , Andrew Morton , Zheng Liang , Zhang Yi , Hou Tao , Miao Xie , "linux-mm @ kvack . org" , "squashfs-devel @ lists . sourceforge . net" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 3:42 PM Phillip Lougher wrote: > > On 09/06/2022 15:46, Xiongwei Song wrote: > > This version is bad for my test. I ran the test below > > "for cnt in $(seq 0 9); do echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; echo > > "Loop ${cnt}:"; time -v find /software/test[0-9][0-9] | xargs -P 24 -i > > cat {} > /dev/null 2>/dev/null; echo ""; done" > > in 90 partitions. > > > > With 9eec1d897139 reverted: > > 1:06.18 (1m + 6.18s) > > 1:05.65 > > 1:06.34 > > 1:06.88 > > 1:06.52 > > 1:06.78 > > 1:06.61 > > 1:06.99 > > 1:06.60 > > 1:06.79 > > > > With this version: > > 2:36.85 (2m + 36.85s) > > 2:28.89 > > 1:43.46 > > 1:41.50 > > 1:42.75 > > 1:43.46 > > 1:43.67 > > 1:44.41 > > 1:44.91 > > 1:45.44 > > > > Any thoughts? > > Thank-you for your latest test results, and they tend to > imply that the latest version of the patch hasn't improved > performance in your use-case. > > One thing which is becoming clear here is that the devil is in > the detail, and your results being summaries are not capturing > enough detail to understand what is happening. They show > something is wrong, but, don't give any guidance as to what > is happening. > > I think it will be difficult to capture more details from > your test case. But, detail can be captured from summaries, by > varying the input and extrapolating from the results. > > By that I mean have you tried changing anything, and observed any > changed results? > > For instance have you tried any of the following > > 1. Changing the parallelism of your test from 24 read threads. > Does 1, 2, 4 etc parallel read threads change the observed > behaviour? In other words is the slow-down observed across > all degrees of parallelism, or is there a critical point. > > 2. Does the Squashfs parallelism options in the kernel configuration > change the behaviour? Knowing if the number of "decompressors" > available changes the difference in performance could be important. > > 3. Are your Squashfs filesystems built using fragments, or without > fragments? Rebuilding the filesystems without fragments, and > observing any different performance, would help to pinpoint > where the issue lies. > > 4. What is the block size used in your Squashfs filesystems. Have > you tried changing the block size, and seen what effect > it has on the difference in performance between the patches? > > 5. You don't mention where your Squashfs filesystems are stored. > Is this slow media or fast media? Have you tried moving > the Squashfs filesystems onto different media and observed > any difference in performance between the patches? > Thanks for your response and inputs. I really appreciated your help. I can try these things but can't provide the detailed results for now because I'm busy with a few things, hence It's hard to focus on this one thing for me. > The fact of the matter is there are many over-lapping factors > which affect the performance of Squashfs filesystems (like any > reasonably complex code), which may be elsewhere. It can only > take a small change somewhere to have a dramatic affect on > performance. > > This is particularly the case with embedded systems, which > may be short on CPU performance, short on RAM, and have low > performance media, and be effectively operating on the "edge". > It can only take a small change, an update for instance, to > change from performing well to badly. Totally agree. > > I speak from experience, having spent over ten years in embedded > Linux as a senior engineer and then as a consultant. I have > my own horror tales as a consultant, dealing with systems pushed > beyond the edge (with hacks), and the customer insisting they > didn't do anything to cause the system to finally break. > > Maybe it is off topic here. But, I remember one instance where > a customer had a system out in the field, which "inexplicably" > started to lock up every 6 months or so. This system had regular > updates "over the air", and I discovered the "lock up" only > started happening after the latest update. It turns out the new version > of the application had grown a new feature which needed more > RAM than normal. This feature wasn't used very often, but, > if it coincided with an infrequent "house-keeping" background task, > the system ran out of memory and locked up (they had disabled the OOM > killer). This was so rare it might only coincide after six months. No > bug, but a slow growth in working set RAM over a number of versions. > > In other words we may be looking at a knock-on side effect of > readahead, which is either caused by issues elsewhere or is > causing issues elsewhere. > > Dealing with it in isolation, as bug in the readahead code is going > to get us nowhere, looking for something that isn't there. > > I'm not saying that this is the case here. But, the more detail > you can provide, and the more test variants you can provide will > help to determine what is the problem. Thanks for your sharing. I will provide detail later. Regards, Xiongwei > > Thanks > > Phillip > > > > > > Regards, > > Xiongwei > > > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 11:03 PM Hsin-Yi Wang wrote: > >> > >> Implement readahead callback for squashfs. It will read datablocks > >> which cover pages in readahead request. For a few cases it will > >> not mark page as uptodate, including: > >> - file end is 0. > >> - zero filled blocks. > >> - current batch of pages isn't in the same datablock. > >> - decompressor error. > >> Otherwise pages will be marked as uptodate. The unhandled pages will be > >> updated by readpage later. > >> > >> Suggested-by: Matthew Wilcox > >> Signed-off-by: Hsin-Yi Wang > >> Reported-by: Matthew Wilcox > >> Reported-by: Phillip Lougher > >> Reported-by: Xiongwei Song > >> Reported-by: Marek Szyprowski > >> Reported-by: Andrew Morton > >> --- > >> v4->v5: > >> - Handle short file cases reported by Marek and Matthew. > >> - Fix checkpatch error reported by Andrew. > >> > >> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220601103922.1338320-4-hsinyi@chromium.org/ > >> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220523065909.883444-4-hsinyi@chromium.org/ > >> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220517082650.2005840-4-hsinyi@chromium.org/ > >> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220516105100.1412740-3-hsinyi@chromium.org/ > >> --- > >> fs/squashfs/file.c | 124 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > >> 1 file changed, 123 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/fs/squashfs/file.c b/fs/squashfs/file.c > >> index a8e495d8eb86..fbd096cd15f4 100644 > >> --- a/fs/squashfs/file.c > >> +++ b/fs/squashfs/file.c > >> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ > >> #include "squashfs_fs_sb.h" > >> #include "squashfs_fs_i.h" > >> #include "squashfs.h" > >> +#include "page_actor.h" > >> > >> /* > >> * Locate cache slot in range [offset, index] for specified inode. If > >> @@ -495,7 +496,128 @@ static int squashfs_read_folio(struct file *file, struct folio *folio) > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> +static void squashfs_readahead(struct readahead_control *ractl) > >> +{ > >> + struct inode *inode = ractl->mapping->host; > >> + struct squashfs_sb_info *msblk = inode->i_sb->s_fs_info; > >> + size_t mask = (1UL << msblk->block_log) - 1; > >> + unsigned short shift = msblk->block_log - PAGE_SHIFT; > >> + loff_t start = readahead_pos(ractl) & ~mask; > >> + size_t len = readahead_length(ractl) + readahead_pos(ractl) - start; > >> + struct squashfs_page_actor *actor; > >> + unsigned int nr_pages = 0; > >> + struct page **pages; > >> + int i, file_end = i_size_read(inode) >> msblk->block_log; > >> + unsigned int max_pages = 1UL << shift; > >> + > >> + readahead_expand(ractl, start, (len | mask) + 1); > >> + > >> + if (file_end == 0) > >> + return; > >> + > >> + pages = kmalloc_array(max_pages, sizeof(void *), GFP_KERNEL); > >> + if (!pages) > >> + return; > >> + > >> + actor = squashfs_page_actor_init_special(pages, max_pages, 0); > >> + if (!actor) > >> + goto out; > >> + > >> + for (;;) { > >> + pgoff_t index; > >> + int res, bsize; > >> + u64 block = 0; > >> + unsigned int expected; > >> + > >> + nr_pages = __readahead_batch(ractl, pages, max_pages); > >> + if (!nr_pages) > >> + break; > >> + > >> + if (readahead_pos(ractl) >= i_size_read(inode)) > >> + goto skip_pages; > >> + > >> + index = pages[0]->index >> shift; > >> + if ((pages[nr_pages - 1]->index >> shift) != index) > >> + goto skip_pages; > >> + > >> + expected = index == file_end ? > >> + (i_size_read(inode) & (msblk->block_size - 1)) : > >> + msblk->block_size; > >> + > >> + bsize = read_blocklist(inode, index, &block); > >> + if (bsize == 0) > >> + goto skip_pages; > >> + > >> + if (nr_pages < max_pages) { > >> + struct squashfs_cache_entry *buffer; > >> + unsigned int block_mask = max_pages - 1; > >> + int offset = pages[0]->index - (pages[0]->index & ~block_mask); > >> + > >> + buffer = squashfs_get_datablock(inode->i_sb, block, > >> + bsize); > >> + if (buffer->error) { > >> + squashfs_cache_put(buffer); > >> + goto skip_pages; > >> + } > >> + > >> + expected -= offset * PAGE_SIZE; > >> + for (i = 0; i < nr_pages && expected > 0; i++, > >> + expected -= PAGE_SIZE, offset++) { > >> + int avail = min_t(int, expected, PAGE_SIZE); > >> + > >> + squashfs_fill_page(pages[i], buffer, > >> + offset * PAGE_SIZE, avail); > >> + unlock_page(pages[i]); > >> + } > >> + > >> + squashfs_cache_put(buffer); > >> + continue; > >> + } > >> + > >> + res = squashfs_read_data(inode->i_sb, block, bsize, NULL, > >> + actor); > >> + > >> + if (res == expected) { > >> + int bytes; > >> + > >> + /* Last page may have trailing bytes not filled */ > >> + bytes = res % PAGE_SIZE; > >> + if (bytes) { > >> + void *pageaddr; > >> + > >> + pageaddr = kmap_atomic(pages[nr_pages - 1]); > >> + memset(pageaddr + bytes, 0, PAGE_SIZE - bytes); > >> + kunmap_atomic(pageaddr); > >> + } > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) { > >> + flush_dcache_page(pages[i]); > >> + SetPageUptodate(pages[i]); > >> + } > >> + } > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) { > >> + unlock_page(pages[i]); > >> + put_page(pages[i]); > >> + } > >> + } > >> + > >> + kfree(actor); > >> + kfree(pages); > >> + return; > >> + > >> +skip_pages: > >> + for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) { > >> + unlock_page(pages[i]); > >> + put_page(pages[i]); > >> + } > >> + > >> + kfree(actor); > >> +out: > >> + kfree(pages); > >> +} > >> > >> const struct address_space_operations squashfs_aops = { > >> - .read_folio = squashfs_read_folio > >> + .read_folio = squashfs_read_folio, > >> + .readahead = squashfs_readahead > >> }; > >> -- > >> 2.36.1.255.ge46751e96f-goog > >> > >> >