diff mbox

[RFC,v4,03/15] vfs,hot_track: add the function for collecting I/O frequency

Message ID 1351177747-19389-4-git-send-email-zwu.kernel@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Zhiyong Wu Oct. 25, 2012, 3:08 p.m. UTC 
From: Zhi Yong Wu <wuzhy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

  Add some utils helpers to update access frequencies
for one file or its range.

Signed-off-by: Zhi Yong Wu <wuzhy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 fs/hot_tracking.c            |  191 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 fs/hot_tracking.h            |    9 ++
 include/linux/hot_tracking.h |    2 +
 3 files changed, 202 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

Comments

Zheng Liu Oct. 28, 2012, 7:55 a.m. UTC | #1 
Hi Zhiyong, 

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:08:55PM +0800, zwu.kernel@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
> @@ -199,6 +342,54 @@ err:
>  }
>  
>  /*
> + * Main function to update access frequency from read/writepage(s) hooks
> + */
> +inline void hot_update_freqs(struct inode *inode, u64 start,
> +			u64 len, int rw)

This function seems too big.  So we really need to inline this function?

Regards,
Zheng

> +{
> +	struct hot_info *root = inode->i_sb->s_hot_root;
> +	struct hot_inode_item *he;
> +	struct hot_range_item *hr;
> +	u32 cur, end;
> +
> +	if (!root || (len == 0))
> +		return;
> +
> +	he = hot_inode_item_find(root, inode->i_ino);
> +	if (IS_ERR(he)) {
> +		WARN_ON(1);
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
> +	spin_lock(&he->hot_inode.lock);
> +	hot_freq_data_update(&he->hot_inode.hot_freq_data, rw);
> +	spin_unlock(&he->hot_inode.lock);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Align ranges on RANGE_SIZE boundary
> +	 * to prevent proliferation of range structs
> +	 */
> +	end = (start + len + RANGE_SIZE - 1) >> RANGE_BITS;
> +	for (cur = (start >> RANGE_BITS); cur < end; cur++) {
> +		hr = hot_range_item_find(he, cur);
> +		if (IS_ERR(hr)) {
> +			WARN_ON(1);
> +			hot_inode_item_put(he);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +
> +		spin_lock(&hr->hot_range.lock);
> +		hot_freq_data_update(&hr->hot_range.hot_freq_data, rw);
> +		spin_unlock(&hr->hot_range.lock);
> +
> +		hot_range_item_put(hr);
> +	}
> +
> +	hot_inode_item_put(he);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hot_update_freqs);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Zhiyong Wu Oct. 28, 2012, 1:51 p.m. UTC | #2 
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Zhiyong,
>
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:08:55PM +0800, zwu.kernel@gmail.com wrote:
> [snip]
>> @@ -199,6 +342,54 @@ err:
>>  }
>>
>>  /*
>> + * Main function to update access frequency from read/writepage(s) hooks
>> + */
>> +inline void hot_update_freqs(struct inode *inode, u64 start,
>> +                     u64 len, int rw)
>
> This function seems too big.  So we really need to inline this function?
As Dave said in his comments, it will add a function call
overhead even when tracking is not enabled. a static inline function
will just result in no extra overhead other than the if
statement....

>
> Regards,
> Zheng
>
>> +{
>> +     struct hot_info *root = inode->i_sb->s_hot_root;
>> +     struct hot_inode_item *he;
>> +     struct hot_range_item *hr;
>> +     u32 cur, end;
>> +
>> +     if (!root || (len == 0))
>> +             return;
>> +
>> +     he = hot_inode_item_find(root, inode->i_ino);
>> +     if (IS_ERR(he)) {
>> +             WARN_ON(1);
>> +             return;
>> +     }
>> +
>> +     spin_lock(&he->hot_inode.lock);
>> +     hot_freq_data_update(&he->hot_inode.hot_freq_data, rw);
>> +     spin_unlock(&he->hot_inode.lock);
>> +
>> +     /*
>> +      * Align ranges on RANGE_SIZE boundary
>> +      * to prevent proliferation of range structs
>> +      */
>> +     end = (start + len + RANGE_SIZE - 1) >> RANGE_BITS;
>> +     for (cur = (start >> RANGE_BITS); cur < end; cur++) {
>> +             hr = hot_range_item_find(he, cur);
>> +             if (IS_ERR(hr)) {
>> +                     WARN_ON(1);
>> +                     hot_inode_item_put(he);
>> +                     return;
>> +             }
>> +
>> +             spin_lock(&hr->hot_range.lock);
>> +             hot_freq_data_update(&hr->hot_range.hot_freq_data, rw);
>> +             spin_unlock(&hr->hot_range.lock);
>> +
>> +             hot_range_item_put(hr);
>> +     }
>> +
>> +     hot_inode_item_put(he);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hot_update_freqs);
Dave Chinner Oct. 29, 2012, 2:01 a.m. UTC | #3 
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 09:51:48PM +0800, Zhi Yong Wu wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Zhiyong,
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:08:55PM +0800, zwu.kernel@gmail.com wrote:
> > [snip]
> >> @@ -199,6 +342,54 @@ err:
> >>  }
> >>
> >>  /*
> >> + * Main function to update access frequency from read/writepage(s) hooks
> >> + */
> >> +inline void hot_update_freqs(struct inode *inode, u64 start,
> >> +                     u64 len, int rw)
> >
> > This function seems too big.  So we really need to inline this function?
> As Dave said in his comments, it will add a function call
> overhead even when tracking is not enabled. a static inline function
> will just result in no extra overhead other than the if
> statement....

I don't think I said that with respect to this code. I think I said
it w.r.t. a define or a small wrapper that decides to call
hot_update_freqs().  A static inline fucntion should only be a
couple of lines of code at most.

A static function, OTOH, can be inlined by the compiler if the
compiler thinks that is a win. But....

.....

> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hot_update_freqs);

... it's an exported function, so it can't be inline or static, so
using "inline" is wrong whatever way you look at it. ;)

Cheers,

Dave.
Zhiyong Wu Oct. 29, 2012, 2:14 a.m. UTC | #4 
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 09:51:48PM +0800, Zhi Yong Wu wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi Zhiyong,
>> >
>> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:08:55PM +0800, zwu.kernel@gmail.com wrote:
>> > [snip]
>> >> @@ -199,6 +342,54 @@ err:
>> >>  }
>> >>
>> >>  /*
>> >> + * Main function to update access frequency from read/writepage(s) hooks
>> >> + */
>> >> +inline void hot_update_freqs(struct inode *inode, u64 start,
>> >> +                     u64 len, int rw)
>> >
>> > This function seems too big.  So we really need to inline this function?
>> As Dave said in his comments, it will add a function call
>> overhead even when tracking is not enabled. a static inline function
>> will just result in no extra overhead other than the if
>> statement....
>
> I don't think I said that with respect to this code. I think I said
> it w.r.t. a define or a small wrapper that decides to call
> hot_update_freqs().  A static inline fucntion should only be a
> couple of lines of code at most.
>
> A static function, OTOH, can be inlined by the compiler if the
> compiler thinks that is a win. But....
thanks for your explaination at first.
>
> .....
>
>> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hot_update_freqs);
>
> ... it's an exported function, so it can't be inline or static, so
> using "inline" is wrong whatever way you look at it. ;)
ah, but i' m surprised by why the compiler find this error.

>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/fs/hot_tracking.c b/fs/hot_tracking.c
index 5fef7e5..201598b 100644
--- a/fs/hot_tracking.c
+++ b/fs/hot_tracking.c
@@ -173,6 +173,149 @@  static void hot_inode_tree_exit(struct hot_info *root)
 	}
 }
 
+struct hot_inode_item
+*hot_inode_item_find(struct hot_info *root, u64 ino)
+{
+	struct hot_inode_item *he;
+	int ret;
+
+again:
+	spin_lock(&root->lock);
+	he = radix_tree_lookup(&root->hot_inode_tree, ino);
+	if (he) {
+		kref_get(&he->hot_inode.refs);
+		spin_unlock(&root->lock);
+		return he;
+	}
+	spin_unlock(&root->lock);
+
+	he = kmem_cache_zalloc(hot_inode_item_cachep,
+				GFP_KERNEL | GFP_NOFS);
+	if (!he)
+		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
+	hot_inode_item_init(he, ino, &root->hot_inode_tree);
+
+	ret = radix_tree_preload(GFP_NOFS & ~__GFP_HIGHMEM);
+	if (ret) {
+		kmem_cache_free(hot_inode_item_cachep, he);
+		return ERR_PTR(ret);
+	}
+
+	spin_lock(&root->lock);
+	ret = radix_tree_insert(&root->hot_inode_tree, ino, he);
+	if (ret == -EEXIST) {
+		kmem_cache_free(hot_inode_item_cachep, he);
+		spin_unlock(&root->lock);
+		radix_tree_preload_end();
+		goto again;
+	}
+	spin_unlock(&root->lock);
+	radix_tree_preload_end();
+
+	kref_get(&he->hot_inode.refs);
+	return he;
+}
+
+static struct hot_range_item
+*hot_range_item_find(struct hot_inode_item *he,
+			u32 start)
+{
+	struct hot_range_item *hr;
+	int ret;
+
+again:
+	spin_lock(&he->lock);
+	hr = radix_tree_lookup(&he->hot_range_tree, start);
+	if (hr) {
+		kref_get(&hr->hot_range.refs);
+		spin_unlock(&he->lock);
+		return hr;
+	}
+	spin_unlock(&he->lock);
+
+	hr = kmem_cache_zalloc(hot_range_item_cachep,
+				GFP_KERNEL | GFP_NOFS);
+	if (!hr)
+		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
+	hot_range_item_init(hr, start, he);
+
+	ret = radix_tree_preload(GFP_NOFS & ~__GFP_HIGHMEM);
+	if (ret) {
+		kmem_cache_free(hot_range_item_cachep, hr);
+		return ERR_PTR(ret);
+	}
+
+	spin_lock(&he->lock);
+	ret = radix_tree_insert(&he->hot_range_tree, start, hr);
+	if (ret == -EEXIST) {
+		kmem_cache_free(hot_range_item_cachep, hr);
+		spin_unlock(&he->lock);
+		radix_tree_preload_end();
+		goto again;
+	}
+	spin_unlock(&he->lock);
+	radix_tree_preload_end();
+
+	kref_get(&hr->hot_range.refs);
+	return hr;
+}
+
+/*
+ * This function does the actual work of updating the frequency numbers,
+ * whatever they turn out to be. FREQ_POWER determines how many atime
+ * deltas we keep track of (as a power of 2). So, setting it to anything above
+ * 16ish is probably overkill. Also, the higher the power, the more bits get
+ * right shifted out of the timestamp, reducing precision, so take note of that
+ * as well.
+ *
+ * The caller should have already locked freq_data's parent's spinlock.
+ *
+ * FREQ_POWER, defined immediately below, determines how heavily to weight
+ * the current frequency numbers against the newest access. For example, a value
+ * of 4 means that the new access information will be weighted 1/16th (ie 2^-4)
+ * as heavily as the existing frequency info. In essence, this is a kludged-
+ * together version of a weighted average, since we can't afford to keep all of
+ * the information that it would take to get a _real_ weighted average.
+ */
+static u64 hot_average_update(struct timespec old_atime,
+		struct timespec cur_time, u64 old_avg)
+{
+	struct timespec delta_ts;
+	u64 new_avg;
+	u64 new_delta;
+
+	delta_ts = timespec_sub(cur_time, old_atime);
+	new_delta = timespec_to_ns(&delta_ts) >> FREQ_POWER;
+
+	new_avg = (old_avg << FREQ_POWER) - old_avg + new_delta;
+	new_avg = new_avg >> FREQ_POWER;
+
+	return new_avg;
+}
+
+static void hot_freq_data_update(struct hot_freq_data *freq_data, bool write)
+{
+	struct timespec cur_time = current_kernel_time();
+
+	if (write) {
+		freq_data->nr_writes += 1;
+		freq_data->avg_delta_writes = hot_average_update(
+				freq_data->last_write_time,
+				cur_time,
+				freq_data->avg_delta_writes);
+		freq_data->last_write_time = cur_time;
+	} else {
+		freq_data->nr_reads += 1;
+		freq_data->avg_delta_reads = hot_average_update(
+				freq_data->last_read_time,
+				cur_time,
+				freq_data->avg_delta_reads);
+		freq_data->last_read_time = cur_time;
+	}
+}
+
 /*
  * Initialize kmem cache for hot_inode_item and hot_range_item.
  */
@@ -199,6 +342,54 @@  err:
 }
 
 /*
+ * Main function to update access frequency from read/writepage(s) hooks
+ */
+inline void hot_update_freqs(struct inode *inode, u64 start,
+			u64 len, int rw)
+{
+	struct hot_info *root = inode->i_sb->s_hot_root;
+	struct hot_inode_item *he;
+	struct hot_range_item *hr;
+	u32 cur, end;
+
+	if (!root || (len == 0))
+		return;
+
+	he = hot_inode_item_find(root, inode->i_ino);
+	if (IS_ERR(he)) {
+		WARN_ON(1);
+		return;
+	}
+
+	spin_lock(&he->hot_inode.lock);
+	hot_freq_data_update(&he->hot_inode.hot_freq_data, rw);
+	spin_unlock(&he->hot_inode.lock);
+
+	/*
+	 * Align ranges on RANGE_SIZE boundary
+	 * to prevent proliferation of range structs
+	 */
+	end = (start + len + RANGE_SIZE - 1) >> RANGE_BITS;
+	for (cur = (start >> RANGE_BITS); cur < end; cur++) {
+		hr = hot_range_item_find(he, cur);
+		if (IS_ERR(hr)) {
+			WARN_ON(1);
+			hot_inode_item_put(he);
+			return;
+		}
+
+		spin_lock(&hr->hot_range.lock);
+		hot_freq_data_update(&hr->hot_range.hot_freq_data, rw);
+		spin_unlock(&hr->hot_range.lock);
+
+		hot_range_item_put(hr);
+	}
+
+	hot_inode_item_put(he);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hot_update_freqs);
+
+/*
  * Initialize the data structures for hot data tracking.
  */
 int hot_track_init(struct super_block *sb)
diff --git a/fs/hot_tracking.h b/fs/hot_tracking.h
index febf699..3e5f5d0 100644
--- a/fs/hot_tracking.h
+++ b/fs/hot_tracking.h
@@ -19,5 +19,14 @@ 
 /* values for hot_freq_data flags */
 #define FREQ_DATA_TYPE_INODE (1 << 0)
 #define FREQ_DATA_TYPE_RANGE (1 << 1)
+/* size of sub-file ranges */
+#define RANGE_BITS 20
+#define RANGE_SIZE (1 << RANGE_BITS)
+
+#define FREQ_POWER 4
+
+struct hot_inode_item
+*hot_inode_item_find(struct hot_info *root, u64 ino);
+void hot_inode_item_put(struct hot_inode_item *he);
 
 #endif /* __HOT_TRACKING__ */
diff --git a/include/linux/hot_tracking.h b/include/linux/hot_tracking.h
index 592a6eb..de68f66 100644
--- a/include/linux/hot_tracking.h
+++ b/include/linux/hot_tracking.h
@@ -72,5 +72,7 @@  void __init hot_cache_init(void);
 int hot_track_init(struct super_block *sb);
 void hot_track_exit(struct super_block *sb);
 
+inline void hot_update_freqs(struct inode *inode, u64 start,
+				u64 len, int rw);
 
 #endif  /* _LINUX_HOTTRACK_H */