Skip to content
Commit cc7ff57a authored by Coly Li's avatar Coly Li Committed by Greg Kroah-Hartman
Browse files

bcache: remove incremental dirty sector counting for bch_sectors_dirty_init()



commit 80db4e47 upstream.

After making bch_sectors_dirty_init() being multithreaded, the existing
incremental dirty sector counting in bch_root_node_dirty_init() doesn't
release btree occupation after iterating 500000 (INIT_KEYS_EACH_TIME)
bkeys. Because a read lock is added on btree root node to prevent the
btree to be split during the dirty sectors counting, other I/O requester
has no chance to gain the write lock even restart bcache_btree().

That is to say, the incremental dirty sectors counting is incompatible
to the multhreaded bch_sectors_dirty_init(). We have to choose one and
drop another one.

In my testing, with 512 bytes random writes, I generate 1.2T dirty data
and a btree with 400K nodes. With single thread and incremental dirty
sectors counting, it takes 30+ minites to register the backing device.
And with multithreaded dirty sectors counting, the backing device
registration can be accomplished within 2 minutes.

The 30+ minutes V.S. 2- minutes difference makes me decide to keep
multithreaded bch_sectors_dirty_init() and drop the incremental dirty
sectors counting. This is what this patch does.

But INIT_KEYS_EACH_TIME is kept, in sectors_dirty_init_fn() the CPU
will be released by cond_resched() after every INIT_KEYS_EACH_TIME keys
iterated. This is to avoid the watchdog reports a bogus soft lockup
warning.

Fixes: b144e45f ("bcache: make bch_sectors_dirty_init() to be multithreaded")
Signed-off-by: default avatarColy Li <colyli@suse.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220524102336.10684-4-colyli@suse.de


Signed-off-by: default avatarJens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Signed-off-by: default avatarGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
parent df973468
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment