diff mbox

[7/8] blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism

Message ID 1478034531-28559-8-git-send-email-axboe@fb.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Jens Axboe Nov. 1, 2016, 9:08 p.m. UTC
We can hook this up to the block layer, to help throttle buffered
writes.

wbt registers a few trace points that can be used to track what is
happening in the system:

wbt_lat: 259:0: latency 2446318
wbt_stat: 259:0: rmean=2446318, rmin=2446318, rmax=2446318, rsamples=1,
               wmean=518866, wmin=15522, wmax=5330353, wsamples=57
wbt_step: 259:0: step down: step=1, window=72727272, background=8, normal=16, max=32

This shows a sync issue event (wbt_lat) that exceeded it's time. wbt_stat
dumps the current read/write stats for that window, and wbt_step shows a
step down event where we now scale back writes. Each trace includes the
device, 259:0 in this case.

Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
---
 block/Makefile             |   1 +
 block/blk-wbt.c            | 704 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 block/blk-wbt.h            | 166 +++++++++++
 include/trace/events/wbt.h | 153 ++++++++++
 4 files changed, 1024 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 block/blk-wbt.c
 create mode 100644 block/blk-wbt.h
 create mode 100644 include/trace/events/wbt.h

Comments

Jan Kara Nov. 8, 2016, 1:39 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue 01-11-16 15:08:50, Jens Axboe wrote:
> We can hook this up to the block layer, to help throttle buffered
> writes.
> 
> wbt registers a few trace points that can be used to track what is
> happening in the system:
> 
> wbt_lat: 259:0: latency 2446318
> wbt_stat: 259:0: rmean=2446318, rmin=2446318, rmax=2446318, rsamples=1,
>                wmean=518866, wmin=15522, wmax=5330353, wsamples=57
> wbt_step: 259:0: step down: step=1, window=72727272, background=8, normal=16, max=32
> 
> This shows a sync issue event (wbt_lat) that exceeded it's time. wbt_stat
> dumps the current read/write stats for that window, and wbt_step shows a
> step down event where we now scale back writes. Each trace includes the
> device, 259:0 in this case.

Just one serious question and one nit below:

> +void __wbt_done(struct rq_wb *rwb, enum wbt_flags wb_acct)
> +{
> +	struct rq_wait *rqw;
> +	int inflight, limit;
> +
> +	if (!(wb_acct & WBT_TRACKED))
> +		return;
> +
> +	rqw = get_rq_wait(rwb, wb_acct & WBT_KSWAPD);
> +	inflight = atomic_dec_return(&rqw->inflight);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * wbt got disabled with IO in flight. Wake up any potential
> +	 * waiters, we don't have to do more than that.
> +	 */
> +	if (unlikely(!rwb_enabled(rwb))) {
> +		rwb_wake_all(rwb);
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the device does write back caching, drop further down
> +	 * before we wake people up.
> +	 */
> +	if (rwb->wc && !wb_recent_wait(rwb))
> +		limit = 0;
> +	else
> +		limit = rwb->wb_normal;

So for devices with write cache, you will completely drain the device
before waking anybody waiting to issue new requests. Isn't it too strict?
In particular may_queue() will allow new writers to issue new writes once
we drop below the limit so it can happen that some processes will be
effectively starved waiting in may_queue?

> +static void wb_timer_fn(unsigned long data)
> +{
> +	struct rq_wb *rwb = (struct rq_wb *) data;
> +	unsigned int inflight = wbt_inflight(rwb);
> +	int status;
> +
> +	status = latency_exceeded(rwb);
> +
> +	trace_wbt_timer(rwb->bdi, status, rwb->scale_step, inflight);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If we exceeded the latency target, step down. If we did not,
> +	 * step one level up. If we don't know enough to say either exceeded
> +	 * or ok, then don't do anything.
> +	 */
> +	switch (status) {
> +	case LAT_EXCEEDED:
> +		scale_down(rwb, true);
> +		break;
> +	case LAT_OK:
> +		scale_up(rwb);
> +		break;
> +	case LAT_UNKNOWN_WRITES:
> +		scale_up(rwb);
> +		break;
> +	case LAT_UNKNOWN:
> +		if (++rwb->unknown_cnt < RWB_UNKNOWN_BUMP)
> +			break;
> +		/*
> +		 * We get here for two reasons:
> +		 *
> +		 * 1) We previously scaled reduced depth, and we currently
> +		 *    don't have a valid read/write sample. For that case,
> +		 *    slowly return to center state (step == 0).
> +		 * 2) We started a the center step, but don't have a valid
> +		 *    read/write sample, but we do have writes going on.
> +		 *    Allow step to go negative, to increase write perf.
> +		 */

I think part 2) of the comment now belongs to LAT_UNKNOWN_WRITES label.

								Honza
Jens Axboe Nov. 8, 2016, 3:41 p.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, Nov 08 2016, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 01-11-16 15:08:50, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > We can hook this up to the block layer, to help throttle buffered
> > writes.
> > 
> > wbt registers a few trace points that can be used to track what is
> > happening in the system:
> > 
> > wbt_lat: 259:0: latency 2446318
> > wbt_stat: 259:0: rmean=2446318, rmin=2446318, rmax=2446318, rsamples=1,
> >                wmean=518866, wmin=15522, wmax=5330353, wsamples=57
> > wbt_step: 259:0: step down: step=1, window=72727272, background=8, normal=16, max=32
> > 
> > This shows a sync issue event (wbt_lat) that exceeded it's time. wbt_stat
> > dumps the current read/write stats for that window, and wbt_step shows a
> > step down event where we now scale back writes. Each trace includes the
> > device, 259:0 in this case.
> 
> Just one serious question and one nit below:
> 
> > +void __wbt_done(struct rq_wb *rwb, enum wbt_flags wb_acct)
> > +{
> > +	struct rq_wait *rqw;
> > +	int inflight, limit;
> > +
> > +	if (!(wb_acct & WBT_TRACKED))
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	rqw = get_rq_wait(rwb, wb_acct & WBT_KSWAPD);
> > +	inflight = atomic_dec_return(&rqw->inflight);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * wbt got disabled with IO in flight. Wake up any potential
> > +	 * waiters, we don't have to do more than that.
> > +	 */
> > +	if (unlikely(!rwb_enabled(rwb))) {
> > +		rwb_wake_all(rwb);
> > +		return;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * If the device does write back caching, drop further down
> > +	 * before we wake people up.
> > +	 */
> > +	if (rwb->wc && !wb_recent_wait(rwb))
> > +		limit = 0;
> > +	else
> > +		limit = rwb->wb_normal;
> 
> So for devices with write cache, you will completely drain the device
> before waking anybody waiting to issue new requests. Isn't it too strict?
> In particular may_queue() will allow new writers to issue new writes once
> we drop below the limit so it can happen that some processes will be
> effectively starved waiting in may_queue?

It is strict, and perhaps too strict. In testing, it's the only method
that's proven to keep the writeback caching devices in check. It will
round robin the writers, if we have more, which isn't necessarily a bad
thing. Each will get to do a burst of depth writes, then wait for a new
one.

> > +	case LAT_UNKNOWN:
> > +		if (++rwb->unknown_cnt < RWB_UNKNOWN_BUMP)
> > +			break;
> > +		/*
> > +		 * We get here for two reasons:
> > +		 *
> > +		 * 1) We previously scaled reduced depth, and we currently
> > +		 *    don't have a valid read/write sample. For that case,
> > +		 *    slowly return to center state (step == 0).
> > +		 * 2) We started a the center step, but don't have a valid
> > +		 *    read/write sample, but we do have writes going on.
> > +		 *    Allow step to go negative, to increase write perf.
> > +		 */
> 
> I think part 2) of the comment now belongs to LAT_UNKNOWN_WRITES label.

Indeed, that got moved around a bit, I'll fix that up.
Jan Kara Nov. 9, 2016, 8:40 a.m. UTC | #3
On Tue 08-11-16 08:41:09, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 08 2016, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 01-11-16 15:08:50, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > We can hook this up to the block layer, to help throttle buffered
> > > writes.
> > > 
> > > wbt registers a few trace points that can be used to track what is
> > > happening in the system:
> > > 
> > > wbt_lat: 259:0: latency 2446318
> > > wbt_stat: 259:0: rmean=2446318, rmin=2446318, rmax=2446318, rsamples=1,
> > >                wmean=518866, wmin=15522, wmax=5330353, wsamples=57
> > > wbt_step: 259:0: step down: step=1, window=72727272, background=8, normal=16, max=32
> > > 
> > > This shows a sync issue event (wbt_lat) that exceeded it's time. wbt_stat
> > > dumps the current read/write stats for that window, and wbt_step shows a
> > > step down event where we now scale back writes. Each trace includes the
> > > device, 259:0 in this case.
> > 
> > Just one serious question and one nit below:
> > 
> > > +void __wbt_done(struct rq_wb *rwb, enum wbt_flags wb_acct)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct rq_wait *rqw;
> > > +	int inflight, limit;
> > > +
> > > +	if (!(wb_acct & WBT_TRACKED))
> > > +		return;
> > > +
> > > +	rqw = get_rq_wait(rwb, wb_acct & WBT_KSWAPD);
> > > +	inflight = atomic_dec_return(&rqw->inflight);
> > > +
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * wbt got disabled with IO in flight. Wake up any potential
> > > +	 * waiters, we don't have to do more than that.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	if (unlikely(!rwb_enabled(rwb))) {
> > > +		rwb_wake_all(rwb);
> > > +		return;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * If the device does write back caching, drop further down
> > > +	 * before we wake people up.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	if (rwb->wc && !wb_recent_wait(rwb))
> > > +		limit = 0;
> > > +	else
> > > +		limit = rwb->wb_normal;
> > 
> > So for devices with write cache, you will completely drain the device
> > before waking anybody waiting to issue new requests. Isn't it too strict?
> > In particular may_queue() will allow new writers to issue new writes once
> > we drop below the limit so it can happen that some processes will be
> > effectively starved waiting in may_queue?
> 
> It is strict, and perhaps too strict. In testing, it's the only method
> that's proven to keep the writeback caching devices in check. It will
> round robin the writers, if we have more, which isn't necessarily a bad
> thing. Each will get to do a burst of depth writes, then wait for a new
> one.

Well, I'm more concerned about a situation where one writer does a bursty
write and blocks sleeping in may_queue(). Another writer produces a steady
flow of write requests so that never causes the write queue to completely
drain but that writer also never blocks in may_queue() when it starts
queueing after write queue has somewhat drained because it never submits
many requests in parallel. In such case the first writer would get starved
AFAIU.

Also I'm not sure why such logic for devices with writeback cache is
needed. Sure the disk is fast to accept writes but if that causes long read
latencies, we should scale down the writeback limits so that we eventually
end up submitting only one write request anyway - effectively the same
thing as limit=0 - won't we?

								Honza
Jens Axboe Nov. 9, 2016, 4:07 p.m. UTC | #4
On 11/09/2016 01:40 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
>>> So for devices with write cache, you will completely drain the device
>>> before waking anybody waiting to issue new requests. Isn't it too strict?
>>> In particular may_queue() will allow new writers to issue new writes once
>>> we drop below the limit so it can happen that some processes will be
>>> effectively starved waiting in may_queue?
>>
>> It is strict, and perhaps too strict. In testing, it's the only method
>> that's proven to keep the writeback caching devices in check. It will
>> round robin the writers, if we have more, which isn't necessarily a bad
>> thing. Each will get to do a burst of depth writes, then wait for a new
>> one.
>
> Well, I'm more concerned about a situation where one writer does a
> bursty write and blocks sleeping in may_queue(). Another writer
> produces a steady flow of write requests so that never causes the
> write queue to completely drain but that writer also never blocks in
> may_queue() when it starts queueing after write queue has somewhat
> drained because it never submits many requests in parallel. In such
> case the first writer would get starved AFAIU.

I see what you are saying. I can modify the logic to ensure that if we
do have a waiter, we queue up others behind it. That should get rid of
that concern.

> Also I'm not sure why such logic for devices with writeback cache is
> needed. Sure the disk is fast to accept writes but if that causes long
> read latencies, we should scale down the writeback limits so that we
> eventually end up submitting only one write request anyway -
> effectively the same thing as limit=0 - won't we?

Basically we want to avoid getting into that situation. The problem with
write caching is that it takes a while for you to notice that anything
is wrong, and when you do, you are way down in the hole. That causes the
first violations to be pretty bad.

I'm fine with playing with this logic and improving it, but I'd rather
wait for a 2nd series for that.
Jens Axboe Nov. 9, 2016, 7:52 p.m. UTC | #5
On 11/09/2016 09:07 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 11/09/2016 01:40 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
>>>> So for devices with write cache, you will completely drain the device
>>>> before waking anybody waiting to issue new requests. Isn't it too
>>>> strict?
>>>> In particular may_queue() will allow new writers to issue new writes
>>>> once
>>>> we drop below the limit so it can happen that some processes will be
>>>> effectively starved waiting in may_queue?
>>>
>>> It is strict, and perhaps too strict. In testing, it's the only method
>>> that's proven to keep the writeback caching devices in check. It will
>>> round robin the writers, if we have more, which isn't necessarily a bad
>>> thing. Each will get to do a burst of depth writes, then wait for a new
>>> one.
>>
>> Well, I'm more concerned about a situation where one writer does a
>> bursty write and blocks sleeping in may_queue(). Another writer
>> produces a steady flow of write requests so that never causes the
>> write queue to completely drain but that writer also never blocks in
>> may_queue() when it starts queueing after write queue has somewhat
>> drained because it never submits many requests in parallel. In such
>> case the first writer would get starved AFAIU.
>
> I see what you are saying. I can modify the logic to ensure that if we
> do have a waiter, we queue up others behind it. That should get rid of
> that concern.

I added that - if we currently have a waiter, we'll add ourselves to the
back of the waitqueue and wait.
Dave Chinner Nov. 10, 2016, midnight UTC | #6
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 09:07:08AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 11/09/2016 01:40 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> >Also I'm not sure why such logic for devices with writeback cache is
> >needed. Sure the disk is fast to accept writes but if that causes long
> >read latencies, we should scale down the writeback limits so that we
> >eventually end up submitting only one write request anyway -
> >effectively the same thing as limit=0 - won't we?
> 
> Basically we want to avoid getting into that situation. The problem with
> write caching is that it takes a while for you to notice that anything
> is wrong, and when you do, you are way down in the hole. That causes the
> first violations to be pretty bad.

Yeah, slow RAID devices with a large BBWC in front of them are
notorious for doing this. You won't notice the actual IO performance
until the write cache is filled (can be GB in size) and by then it's
way too late to fix up with OS level queuing...

Cheers,

Dave.
Jan Kara Nov. 10, 2016, 7:36 p.m. UTC | #7
On Wed 09-11-16 12:52:59, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 11/09/2016 09:07 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >On 11/09/2016 01:40 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> >>>>So for devices with write cache, you will completely drain the device
> >>>>before waking anybody waiting to issue new requests. Isn't it too
> >>>>strict?
> >>>>In particular may_queue() will allow new writers to issue new writes
> >>>>once
> >>>>we drop below the limit so it can happen that some processes will be
> >>>>effectively starved waiting in may_queue?
> >>>
> >>>It is strict, and perhaps too strict. In testing, it's the only method
> >>>that's proven to keep the writeback caching devices in check. It will
> >>>round robin the writers, if we have more, which isn't necessarily a bad
> >>>thing. Each will get to do a burst of depth writes, then wait for a new
> >>>one.
> >>
> >>Well, I'm more concerned about a situation where one writer does a
> >>bursty write and blocks sleeping in may_queue(). Another writer
> >>produces a steady flow of write requests so that never causes the
> >>write queue to completely drain but that writer also never blocks in
> >>may_queue() when it starts queueing after write queue has somewhat
> >>drained because it never submits many requests in parallel. In such
> >>case the first writer would get starved AFAIU.
> >
> >I see what you are saying. I can modify the logic to ensure that if we
> >do have a waiter, we queue up others behind it. That should get rid of
> >that concern.
> 
> I added that - if we currently have a waiter, we'll add ourselves to the
> back of the waitqueue and wait.

OK, sounds good to me. If the write queue draining will show to be an
issue, it will be at least clearly visible with this logic.

								Honza
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/block/Makefile b/block/Makefile
index 2528c596f7ec..a827f988c4e6 100644
--- a/block/Makefile
+++ b/block/Makefile
@@ -24,3 +24,4 @@  obj-$(CONFIG_BLK_CMDLINE_PARSER)	+= cmdline-parser.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY) += bio-integrity.o blk-integrity.o t10-pi.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_BLK_MQ_PCI)	+= blk-mq-pci.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ZONED)	+= blk-zoned.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_BLK_WBT)		+= blk-wbt.o
diff --git a/block/blk-wbt.c b/block/blk-wbt.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..1b1d67aae1d3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/block/blk-wbt.c
@@ -0,0 +1,704 @@ 
+/*
+ * buffered writeback throttling. loosely based on CoDel. We can't drop
+ * packets for IO scheduling, so the logic is something like this:
+ *
+ * - Monitor latencies in a defined window of time.
+ * - If the minimum latency in the above window exceeds some target, increment
+ *   scaling step and scale down queue depth by a factor of 2x. The monitoring
+ *   window is then shrunk to 100 / sqrt(scaling step + 1).
+ * - For any window where we don't have solid data on what the latencies
+ *   look like, retain status quo.
+ * - If latencies look good, decrement scaling step.
+ * - If we're only doing writes, allow the scaling step to go negative. This
+ *   will temporarily boost write performance, snapping back to a stable
+ *   scaling step of 0 if reads show up or the heavy writers finish. Unlike
+ *   positive scaling steps where we shrink the monitoring window, a negative
+ *   scaling step retains the default step==0 window size.
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2016 Jens Axboe
+ *
+ */
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/blk_types.h>
+#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/backing-dev.h>
+#include <linux/swap.h>
+
+#include "blk-wbt.h"
+
+#define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
+#include <trace/events/wbt.h>
+
+enum {
+	/*
+	 * Default setting, we'll scale up (to 75% of QD max) or down (min 1)
+	 * from here depending on device stats
+	 */
+	RWB_DEF_DEPTH	= 16,
+
+	/*
+	 * 100msec window
+	 */
+	RWB_WINDOW_NSEC		= 100 * 1000 * 1000ULL,
+
+	/*
+	 * Disregard stats, if we don't meet this minimum
+	 */
+	RWB_MIN_WRITE_SAMPLES	= 3,
+
+	/*
+	 * If we have this number of consecutive windows with not enough
+	 * information to scale up or down, scale up.
+	 */
+	RWB_UNKNOWN_BUMP	= 5,
+};
+
+static inline bool rwb_enabled(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	return rwb && rwb->wb_normal != 0;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Increment 'v', if 'v' is below 'below'. Returns true if we succeeded,
+ * false if 'v' + 1 would be bigger than 'below'.
+ */
+static bool atomic_inc_below(atomic_t *v, int below)
+{
+	int cur = atomic_read(v);
+
+	for (;;) {
+		int old;
+
+		if (cur >= below)
+			return false;
+		old = atomic_cmpxchg(v, cur, cur + 1);
+		if (old == cur)
+			break;
+		cur = old;
+	}
+
+	return true;
+}
+
+static void wb_timestamp(struct rq_wb *rwb, unsigned long *var)
+{
+	if (rwb_enabled(rwb)) {
+		const unsigned long cur = jiffies;
+
+		if (cur != *var)
+			*var = cur;
+	}
+}
+
+/*
+ * If a task was rate throttled in balance_dirty_pages() within the last
+ * second or so, use that to indicate a higher cleaning rate.
+ */
+static bool wb_recent_wait(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	struct bdi_writeback *wb = &rwb->bdi->wb;
+
+	return time_before(jiffies, wb->dirty_sleep + HZ);
+}
+
+static inline struct rq_wait *get_rq_wait(struct rq_wb *rwb, bool is_kswapd)
+{
+	return &rwb->rq_wait[is_kswapd];
+}
+
+static void rwb_wake_all(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < WBT_NUM_RWQ; i++) {
+		struct rq_wait *rqw = &rwb->rq_wait[i];
+
+		if (waitqueue_active(&rqw->wait))
+			wake_up_all(&rqw->wait);
+	}
+}
+
+void __wbt_done(struct rq_wb *rwb, enum wbt_flags wb_acct)
+{
+	struct rq_wait *rqw;
+	int inflight, limit;
+
+	if (!(wb_acct & WBT_TRACKED))
+		return;
+
+	rqw = get_rq_wait(rwb, wb_acct & WBT_KSWAPD);
+	inflight = atomic_dec_return(&rqw->inflight);
+
+	/*
+	 * wbt got disabled with IO in flight. Wake up any potential
+	 * waiters, we don't have to do more than that.
+	 */
+	if (unlikely(!rwb_enabled(rwb))) {
+		rwb_wake_all(rwb);
+		return;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * If the device does write back caching, drop further down
+	 * before we wake people up.
+	 */
+	if (rwb->wc && !wb_recent_wait(rwb))
+		limit = 0;
+	else
+		limit = rwb->wb_normal;
+
+	/*
+	 * Don't wake anyone up if we are above the normal limit.
+	 */
+	if (inflight && inflight >= limit)
+		return;
+
+	if (waitqueue_active(&rqw->wait)) {
+		int diff = limit - inflight;
+
+		if (!inflight || diff >= rwb->wb_background / 2)
+			wake_up(&rqw->wait);
+	}
+}
+
+/*
+ * Called on completion of a request. Note that it's also called when
+ * a request is merged, when the request gets freed.
+ */
+void wbt_done(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+	if (!rwb)
+		return;
+
+	if (!wbt_is_tracked(stat)) {
+		if (rwb->sync_cookie == stat) {
+			rwb->sync_issue = 0;
+			rwb->sync_cookie = NULL;
+		}
+
+		if (wbt_is_read(stat))
+			wb_timestamp(rwb, &rwb->last_comp);
+		wbt_clear_state(stat);
+	} else {
+		WARN_ON_ONCE(stat == rwb->sync_cookie);
+		__wbt_done(rwb, wbt_stat_to_mask(stat));
+		wbt_clear_state(stat);
+	}
+}
+
+/*
+ * Return true, if we can't increase the depth further by scaling
+ */
+static bool calc_wb_limits(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	unsigned int depth;
+	bool ret = false;
+
+	if (!rwb->min_lat_nsec) {
+		rwb->wb_max = rwb->wb_normal = rwb->wb_background = 0;
+		return false;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * For QD=1 devices, this is a special case. It's important for those
+	 * to have one request ready when one completes, so force a depth of
+	 * 2 for those devices. On the backend, it'll be a depth of 1 anyway,
+	 * since the device can't have more than that in flight. If we're
+	 * scaling down, then keep a setting of 1/1/1.
+	 */
+	if (rwb->queue_depth == 1) {
+		if (rwb->scale_step > 0)
+			rwb->wb_max = rwb->wb_normal = 1;
+		else {
+			rwb->wb_max = rwb->wb_normal = 2;
+			ret = true;
+		}
+		rwb->wb_background = 1;
+	} else {
+		/*
+		 * scale_step == 0 is our default state. If we have suffered
+		 * latency spikes, step will be > 0, and we shrink the
+		 * allowed write depths. If step is < 0, we're only doing
+		 * writes, and we allow a temporarily higher depth to
+		 * increase performance.
+		 */
+		depth = min_t(unsigned int, RWB_DEF_DEPTH, rwb->queue_depth);
+		if (rwb->scale_step > 0)
+			depth = 1 + ((depth - 1) >> min(31, rwb->scale_step));
+		else if (rwb->scale_step < 0) {
+			unsigned int maxd = 3 * rwb->queue_depth / 4;
+
+			depth = 1 + ((depth - 1) << -rwb->scale_step);
+			if (depth > maxd) {
+				depth = maxd;
+				ret = true;
+			}
+		}
+
+		/*
+		 * Set our max/normal/bg queue depths based on how far
+		 * we have scaled down (->scale_step).
+		 */
+		rwb->wb_max = depth;
+		rwb->wb_normal = (rwb->wb_max + 1) / 2;
+		rwb->wb_background = (rwb->wb_max + 3) / 4;
+	}
+
+	return ret;
+}
+
+static bool inline stat_sample_valid(struct blk_rq_stat *stat)
+{
+	/*
+	 * We need at least one read sample, and a minimum of
+	 * RWB_MIN_WRITE_SAMPLES. We require some write samples to know
+	 * that it's writes impacting us, and not just some sole read on
+	 * a device that is in a lower power state.
+	 */
+	return stat[0].nr_samples >= 1 &&
+		stat[1].nr_samples >= RWB_MIN_WRITE_SAMPLES;
+}
+
+static u64 rwb_sync_issue_lat(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	u64 now, issue = ACCESS_ONCE(rwb->sync_issue);
+
+	if (!issue || !rwb->sync_cookie)
+		return 0;
+
+	now = ktime_to_ns(ktime_get());
+	return now - issue;
+}
+
+enum {
+	LAT_OK = 1,
+	LAT_UNKNOWN,
+	LAT_UNKNOWN_WRITES,
+	LAT_EXCEEDED,
+};
+
+static int __latency_exceeded(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct blk_rq_stat *stat)
+{
+	u64 thislat;
+
+	/*
+	 * If our stored sync issue exceeds the window size, or it
+	 * exceeds our min target AND we haven't logged any entries,
+	 * flag the latency as exceeded. wbt works off completion latencies,
+	 * but for a flooded device, a single sync IO can take a long time
+	 * to complete after being issued. If this time exceeds our
+	 * monitoring window AND we didn't see any other completions in that
+	 * window, then count that sync IO as a violation of the latency.
+	 */
+	thislat = rwb_sync_issue_lat(rwb);
+	if (thislat > rwb->cur_win_nsec ||
+	    (thislat > rwb->min_lat_nsec && !stat[0].nr_samples)) {
+		trace_wbt_lat(rwb->bdi, thislat);
+		return LAT_EXCEEDED;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * No read/write mix, if stat isn't valid
+	 */
+	if (!stat_sample_valid(stat)) {
+		/*
+		 * If we had writes in this stat window and the window is
+		 * current, we're only doing writes. If a task recently
+		 * waited or still has writes in flights, consider us doing
+		 * just writes as well.
+		 */
+		if ((stat[1].nr_samples && rwb->stat_ops->is_current(stat)) ||
+		    wb_recent_wait(rwb) || wbt_inflight(rwb))
+			return LAT_UNKNOWN_WRITES;
+		return LAT_UNKNOWN;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * If the 'min' latency exceeds our target, step down.
+	 */
+	if (stat[0].min > rwb->min_lat_nsec) {
+		trace_wbt_lat(rwb->bdi, stat[0].min);
+		trace_wbt_stat(rwb->bdi, stat);
+		return LAT_EXCEEDED;
+	}
+
+	if (rwb->scale_step)
+		trace_wbt_stat(rwb->bdi, stat);
+
+	return LAT_OK;
+}
+
+static int latency_exceeded(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	struct blk_rq_stat stat[2];
+
+	rwb->stat_ops->get(rwb->ops_data, stat);
+	return __latency_exceeded(rwb, stat);
+}
+
+static void rwb_trace_step(struct rq_wb *rwb, const char *msg)
+{
+	trace_wbt_step(rwb->bdi, msg, rwb->scale_step, rwb->cur_win_nsec,
+			rwb->wb_background, rwb->wb_normal, rwb->wb_max);
+}
+
+static void scale_up(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	/*
+	 * Hit max in previous round, stop here
+	 */
+	if (rwb->scaled_max)
+		return;
+
+	rwb->scale_step--;
+	rwb->unknown_cnt = 0;
+	rwb->stat_ops->clear(rwb->ops_data);
+
+	rwb->scaled_max = calc_wb_limits(rwb);
+
+	rwb_wake_all(rwb);
+
+	rwb_trace_step(rwb, "step up");
+}
+
+/*
+ * Scale rwb down. If 'hard_throttle' is set, do it quicker, since we
+ * had a latency violation.
+ */
+static void scale_down(struct rq_wb *rwb, bool hard_throttle)
+{
+	/*
+	 * Stop scaling down when we've hit the limit. This also prevents
+	 * ->scale_step from going to crazy values, if the device can't
+	 * keep up.
+	 */
+	if (rwb->wb_max == 1)
+		return;
+
+	if (rwb->scale_step < 0 && hard_throttle)
+		rwb->scale_step = 0;
+	else
+		rwb->scale_step++;
+
+	rwb->scaled_max = false;
+	rwb->unknown_cnt = 0;
+	rwb->stat_ops->clear(rwb->ops_data);
+	calc_wb_limits(rwb);
+	rwb_trace_step(rwb, "step down");
+}
+
+static void rwb_arm_timer(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	unsigned long expires;
+
+	if (rwb->scale_step > 0) {
+		/*
+		 * We should speed this up, using some variant of a fast
+		 * integer inverse square root calculation. Since we only do
+		 * this for every window expiration, it's not a huge deal,
+		 * though.
+		 */
+		rwb->cur_win_nsec = div_u64(rwb->win_nsec << 4,
+					int_sqrt((rwb->scale_step + 1) << 8));
+	} else {
+		/*
+		 * For step < 0, we don't want to increase/decrease the
+		 * window size.
+		 */
+		rwb->cur_win_nsec = rwb->win_nsec;
+	}
+
+	expires = jiffies + nsecs_to_jiffies(rwb->cur_win_nsec);
+	mod_timer(&rwb->window_timer, expires);
+}
+
+static void wb_timer_fn(unsigned long data)
+{
+	struct rq_wb *rwb = (struct rq_wb *) data;
+	unsigned int inflight = wbt_inflight(rwb);
+	int status;
+
+	status = latency_exceeded(rwb);
+
+	trace_wbt_timer(rwb->bdi, status, rwb->scale_step, inflight);
+
+	/*
+	 * If we exceeded the latency target, step down. If we did not,
+	 * step one level up. If we don't know enough to say either exceeded
+	 * or ok, then don't do anything.
+	 */
+	switch (status) {
+	case LAT_EXCEEDED:
+		scale_down(rwb, true);
+		break;
+	case LAT_OK:
+		scale_up(rwb);
+		break;
+	case LAT_UNKNOWN_WRITES:
+		scale_up(rwb);
+		break;
+	case LAT_UNKNOWN:
+		if (++rwb->unknown_cnt < RWB_UNKNOWN_BUMP)
+			break;
+		/*
+		 * We get here for two reasons:
+		 *
+		 * 1) We previously scaled reduced depth, and we currently
+		 *    don't have a valid read/write sample. For that case,
+		 *    slowly return to center state (step == 0).
+		 * 2) We started a the center step, but don't have a valid
+		 *    read/write sample, but we do have writes going on.
+		 *    Allow step to go negative, to increase write perf.
+		 */
+		if (rwb->scale_step > 0)
+			scale_up(rwb);
+		else if (rwb->scale_step < 0)
+			scale_down(rwb, false);
+		break;
+	default:
+		break;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * Re-arm timer, if we have IO in flight
+	 */
+	if (rwb->scale_step || inflight)
+		rwb_arm_timer(rwb);
+}
+
+void wbt_update_limits(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	rwb->scale_step = 0;
+	rwb->scaled_max = false;
+	calc_wb_limits(rwb);
+
+	rwb_wake_all(rwb);
+}
+
+static bool close_io(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	const unsigned long now = jiffies;
+
+	return time_before(now, rwb->last_issue + HZ / 10) ||
+		time_before(now, rwb->last_comp + HZ / 10);
+}
+
+#define REQ_HIPRIO	(REQ_SYNC | REQ_META | REQ_PRIO)
+
+static inline unsigned int get_limit(struct rq_wb *rwb, unsigned long rw)
+{
+	unsigned int limit;
+
+	/*
+	 * At this point we know it's a buffered write. If this is
+	 * kswapd trying to free memory, or REQ_SYNC is set, set, then
+	 * it's WB_SYNC_ALL writeback, and we'll use the max limit for
+	 * that. If the write is marked as a background write, then use
+	 * the idle limit, or go to normal if we haven't had competing
+	 * IO for a bit.
+	 */
+	if ((rw & REQ_HIPRIO) || wb_recent_wait(rwb) || current_is_kswapd())
+		limit = rwb->wb_max;
+	else if ((rw & REQ_BACKGROUND) || close_io(rwb)) {
+		/*
+		 * If less than 100ms since we completed unrelated IO,
+		 * limit us to half the depth for background writeback.
+		 */
+		limit = rwb->wb_background;
+	} else
+		limit = rwb->wb_normal;
+
+	return limit;
+}
+
+static inline bool may_queue(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct rq_wait *rqw,
+			     unsigned long rw)
+{
+	/*
+	 * inc it here even if disabled, since we'll dec it at completion.
+	 * this only happens if the task was sleeping in __wbt_wait(),
+	 * and someone turned it off at the same time.
+	 */
+	if (!rwb_enabled(rwb)) {
+		atomic_inc(&rqw->inflight);
+		return true;
+	}
+
+	return atomic_inc_below(&rqw->inflight, get_limit(rwb, rw));
+}
+
+/*
+ * Block if we will exceed our limit, or if we are currently waiting for
+ * the timer to kick off queuing again.
+ */
+static void __wbt_wait(struct rq_wb *rwb, unsigned long rw, spinlock_t *lock)
+{
+	struct rq_wait *rqw = get_rq_wait(rwb, current_is_kswapd());
+	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
+
+	if (may_queue(rwb, rqw, rw))
+		return;
+
+	do {
+		prepare_to_wait_exclusive(&rqw->wait, &wait,
+						TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
+
+		if (may_queue(rwb, rqw, rw))
+			break;
+
+		if (lock)
+			spin_unlock_irq(lock);
+
+		io_schedule();
+
+		if (lock)
+			spin_lock_irq(lock);
+	} while (1);
+
+	finish_wait(&rqw->wait, &wait);
+}
+
+static inline bool wbt_should_throttle(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct bio *bio)
+{
+	const int op = bio_op(bio);
+
+	/*
+	 * If not a WRITE (or a discard), do nothing
+	 */
+	if (!(op == REQ_OP_WRITE || op == REQ_OP_DISCARD))
+		return false;
+
+	/*
+	 * Don't throttle WRITE_ODIRECT
+	 */
+	if ((bio->bi_opf & (REQ_SYNC | REQ_IDLE)) == (REQ_SYNC | REQ_IDLE))
+		return false;
+
+	return true;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Returns true if the IO request should be accounted, false if not.
+ * May sleep, if we have exceeded the writeback limits. Caller can pass
+ * in an irq held spinlock, if it holds one when calling this function.
+ * If we do sleep, we'll release and re-grab it.
+ */
+unsigned int wbt_wait(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct bio *bio, spinlock_t *lock)
+{
+	unsigned int ret = 0;
+
+	if (!rwb_enabled(rwb))
+		return 0;
+
+	if (bio_op(bio) == REQ_OP_READ)
+		ret = WBT_READ;
+
+	if (!wbt_should_throttle(rwb, bio)) {
+		if (ret & WBT_READ)
+			wb_timestamp(rwb, &rwb->last_issue);
+		return ret;
+	}
+
+	__wbt_wait(rwb, bio->bi_opf, lock);
+
+	if (!timer_pending(&rwb->window_timer))
+		rwb_arm_timer(rwb);
+
+	if (current_is_kswapd())
+		ret |= WBT_KSWAPD;
+
+	return ret | WBT_TRACKED;
+}
+
+void wbt_issue(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+	if (!rwb_enabled(rwb))
+		return;
+
+	/*
+	 * Track sync issue, in case it takes a long time to complete. Allows
+	 * us to react quicker, if a sync IO takes a long time to complete.
+	 * Note that this is just a hint. 'stat' can go away when the
+	 * request completes, so it's important we never dereference it. We
+	 * only use the address to compare with, which is why we store the
+	 * sync_issue time locally.
+	 */
+	if (wbt_is_read(stat) && !rwb->sync_issue) {
+		rwb->sync_cookie = stat;
+		rwb->sync_issue = blk_stat_time(stat);
+	}
+}
+
+void wbt_requeue(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+	if (!rwb_enabled(rwb))
+		return;
+	if (stat == rwb->sync_cookie) {
+		rwb->sync_issue = 0;
+		rwb->sync_cookie = NULL;
+	}
+}
+
+void wbt_set_queue_depth(struct rq_wb *rwb, unsigned int depth)
+{
+	if (rwb) {
+		rwb->queue_depth = depth;
+		wbt_update_limits(rwb);
+	}
+}
+
+void wbt_set_write_cache(struct rq_wb *rwb, bool write_cache_on)
+{
+	if (rwb)
+		rwb->wc = write_cache_on;
+}
+
+void wbt_disable(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	if (rwb) {
+		del_timer_sync(&rwb->window_timer);
+		rwb->win_nsec = rwb->min_lat_nsec = 0;
+		wbt_update_limits(rwb);
+	}
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(wbt_disable);
+
+struct rq_wb *wbt_init(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, struct wb_stat_ops *ops,
+		       void *ops_data)
+{
+	struct rq_wb *rwb;
+	int i;
+
+	BUILD_BUG_ON(WBT_NR_BITS > BLK_STAT_RES_BITS);
+
+	if (!ops->get || !ops->is_current || !ops->clear)
+		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+
+	rwb = kzalloc(sizeof(*rwb), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!rwb)
+		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < WBT_NUM_RWQ; i++) {
+		atomic_set(&rwb->rq_wait[i].inflight, 0);
+		init_waitqueue_head(&rwb->rq_wait[i].wait);
+	}
+
+	setup_timer(&rwb->window_timer, wb_timer_fn, (unsigned long) rwb);
+	rwb->wc = 1;
+	rwb->queue_depth = RWB_DEF_DEPTH;
+	rwb->last_comp = rwb->last_issue = jiffies;
+	rwb->bdi = bdi;
+	rwb->win_nsec = RWB_WINDOW_NSEC;
+	rwb->stat_ops = ops;
+	rwb->ops_data = ops_data;
+	wbt_update_limits(rwb);
+	return rwb;
+}
+
+void wbt_exit(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	if (rwb) {
+		del_timer_sync(&rwb->window_timer);
+		kfree(rwb);
+	}
+}
diff --git a/block/blk-wbt.h b/block/blk-wbt.h
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..784e392b20e1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/block/blk-wbt.h
@@ -0,0 +1,166 @@ 
+#ifndef WB_THROTTLE_H
+#define WB_THROTTLE_H
+
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/atomic.h>
+#include <linux/wait.h>
+#include <linux/timer.h>
+#include <linux/ktime.h>
+
+#include "blk-stat.h"
+
+enum wbt_flags {
+	WBT_TRACKED		= 1,	/* write, tracked for throttling */
+	WBT_READ		= 2,	/* read */
+	WBT_KSWAPD		= 4,	/* write, from kswapd */
+
+	WBT_NR_BITS		= 3,	/* number of bits */
+};
+
+enum {
+	WBT_NUM_RWQ		= 2,
+};
+
+static inline void wbt_clear_state(struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+	stat->time &= BLK_STAT_TIME_MASK;
+}
+
+static inline enum wbt_flags wbt_stat_to_mask(struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+	return (stat->time & BLK_STAT_MASK) >> BLK_STAT_SHIFT;
+}
+
+static inline void wbt_track(struct blk_issue_stat *stat, enum wbt_flags wb_acct)
+{
+	stat->time |= ((u64) wb_acct) << BLK_STAT_SHIFT;
+}
+
+static inline bool wbt_is_tracked(struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+	return (stat->time >> BLK_STAT_SHIFT) & WBT_TRACKED;
+}
+
+static inline bool wbt_is_read(struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+	return (stat->time >> BLK_STAT_SHIFT) & WBT_READ;
+}
+
+struct wb_stat_ops {
+	void (*get)(void *, struct blk_rq_stat *);
+	bool (*is_current)(struct blk_rq_stat *);
+	void (*clear)(void *);
+};
+
+struct rq_wait {
+	wait_queue_head_t wait;
+	atomic_t inflight;
+};
+
+struct rq_wb {
+	/*
+	 * Settings that govern how we throttle
+	 */
+	unsigned int wb_background;		/* background writeback */
+	unsigned int wb_normal;			/* normal writeback */
+	unsigned int wb_max;			/* max throughput writeback */
+	int scale_step;
+	bool scaled_max;
+
+	/*
+	 * Number of consecutive periods where we don't have enough
+	 * information to make a firm scale up/down decision.
+	 */
+	unsigned int unknown_cnt;
+
+	u64 win_nsec;				/* default window size */
+	u64 cur_win_nsec;			/* current window size */
+
+	struct timer_list window_timer;
+
+	s64 sync_issue;
+	void *sync_cookie;
+
+	unsigned int wc;
+	unsigned int queue_depth;
+
+	unsigned long last_issue;		/* last non-throttled issue */
+	unsigned long last_comp;		/* last non-throttled comp */
+	unsigned long min_lat_nsec;
+	struct backing_dev_info *bdi;
+	struct rq_wait rq_wait[WBT_NUM_RWQ];
+
+	struct wb_stat_ops *stat_ops;
+	void *ops_data;
+};
+
+static inline unsigned int wbt_inflight(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+	unsigned int i, ret = 0;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < WBT_NUM_RWQ; i++)
+		ret += atomic_read(&rwb->rq_wait[i].inflight);
+
+	return ret;
+}
+
+struct backing_dev_info;
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_WBT
+
+void __wbt_done(struct rq_wb *, enum wbt_flags);
+void wbt_done(struct rq_wb *, struct blk_issue_stat *);
+enum wbt_flags wbt_wait(struct rq_wb *, struct bio *, spinlock_t *);
+struct rq_wb *wbt_init(struct backing_dev_info *, struct wb_stat_ops *, void *);
+void wbt_exit(struct rq_wb *);
+void wbt_update_limits(struct rq_wb *);
+void wbt_requeue(struct rq_wb *, struct blk_issue_stat *);
+void wbt_issue(struct rq_wb *, struct blk_issue_stat *);
+void wbt_disable(struct rq_wb *);
+
+void wbt_set_queue_depth(struct rq_wb *, unsigned int);
+void wbt_set_write_cache(struct rq_wb *, bool);
+
+#else
+
+static inline void __wbt_done(struct rq_wb *rwb, enum wbt_flags flags)
+{
+}
+static inline void wbt_done(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+}
+static inline enum wbt_flags wbt_wait(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct bio *bio,
+				      spinlock_t *lock)
+{
+	return 0;
+}
+static inline struct rq_wb *wbt_init(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
+				     struct wb_stat_ops *ops, void *ops_data)
+{
+	return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+}
+static inline void wbt_exit(struct rq_wb *rbw)
+{
+}
+static inline void wbt_update_limits(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+}
+static inline void wbt_requeue(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+}
+static inline void wbt_issue(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct blk_issue_stat *stat)
+{
+}
+static inline void wbt_disable(struct rq_wb *rwb)
+{
+}
+static inline void wbt_set_queue_depth(struct rq_wb *rwb, unsigned int depth)
+{
+}
+static inline void wbt_set_write_cache(struct rq_wb *rwb, bool wc)
+{
+}
+
+#endif /* CONFIG_BLK_WBT */
+
+#endif
diff --git a/include/trace/events/wbt.h b/include/trace/events/wbt.h
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..3c518e455680
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/trace/events/wbt.h
@@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ 
+#undef TRACE_SYSTEM
+#define TRACE_SYSTEM wbt
+
+#if !defined(_TRACE_WBT_H) || defined(TRACE_HEADER_MULTI_READ)
+#define _TRACE_WBT_H
+
+#include <linux/tracepoint.h>
+#include "../../../block/blk-wbt.h"
+
+/**
+ * wbt_stat - trace stats for blk_wb
+ * @stat: array of read/write stats
+ */
+TRACE_EVENT(wbt_stat,
+
+	TP_PROTO(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, struct blk_rq_stat *stat),
+
+	TP_ARGS(bdi, stat),
+
+	TP_STRUCT__entry(
+		__array(char, name, 32)
+		__field(s64, rmean)
+		__field(u64, rmin)
+		__field(u64, rmax)
+		__field(s64, rnr_samples)
+		__field(s64, rtime)
+		__field(s64, wmean)
+		__field(u64, wmin)
+		__field(u64, wmax)
+		__field(s64, wnr_samples)
+		__field(s64, wtime)
+	),
+
+	TP_fast_assign(
+		strncpy(__entry->name, dev_name(bdi->dev), 32);
+		__entry->rmean		= stat[0].mean;
+		__entry->rmin		= stat[0].min;
+		__entry->rmax		= stat[0].max;
+		__entry->rnr_samples	= stat[0].nr_samples;
+		__entry->wmean		= stat[1].mean;
+		__entry->wmin		= stat[1].min;
+		__entry->wmax		= stat[1].max;
+		__entry->wnr_samples	= stat[1].nr_samples;
+	),
+
+	TP_printk("%s: rmean=%llu, rmin=%llu, rmax=%llu, rsamples=%llu, "
+		  "wmean=%llu, wmin=%llu, wmax=%llu, wsamples=%llu\n",
+		  __entry->name, __entry->rmean, __entry->rmin, __entry->rmax,
+		  __entry->rnr_samples, __entry->wmean, __entry->wmin,
+		  __entry->wmax, __entry->wnr_samples)
+);
+
+/**
+ * wbt_lat - trace latency event
+ * @lat: latency trigger
+ */
+TRACE_EVENT(wbt_lat,
+
+	TP_PROTO(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned long lat),
+
+	TP_ARGS(bdi, lat),
+
+	TP_STRUCT__entry(
+		__array(char, name, 32)
+		__field(unsigned long, lat)
+	),
+
+	TP_fast_assign(
+		strncpy(__entry->name, dev_name(bdi->dev), 32);
+		__entry->lat = div_u64(lat, 1000);
+	),
+
+	TP_printk("%s: latency %lluus\n", __entry->name,
+			(unsigned long long) __entry->lat)
+);
+
+/**
+ * wbt_step - trace wb event step
+ * @msg: context message
+ * @step: the current scale step count
+ * @window: the current monitoring window
+ * @bg: the current background queue limit
+ * @normal: the current normal writeback limit
+ * @max: the current max throughput writeback limit
+ */
+TRACE_EVENT(wbt_step,
+
+	TP_PROTO(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, const char *msg,
+		 int step, unsigned long window, unsigned int bg,
+		 unsigned int normal, unsigned int max),
+
+	TP_ARGS(bdi, msg, step, window, bg, normal, max),
+
+	TP_STRUCT__entry(
+		__array(char, name, 32)
+		__field(const char *, msg)
+		__field(int, step)
+		__field(unsigned long, window)
+		__field(unsigned int, bg)
+		__field(unsigned int, normal)
+		__field(unsigned int, max)
+	),
+
+	TP_fast_assign(
+		strncpy(__entry->name, dev_name(bdi->dev), 32);
+		__entry->msg	= msg;
+		__entry->step	= step;
+		__entry->window	= div_u64(window, 1000);
+		__entry->bg	= bg;
+		__entry->normal	= normal;
+		__entry->max	= max;
+	),
+
+	TP_printk("%s: %s: step=%d, window=%luus, background=%u, normal=%u, max=%u\n",
+		  __entry->name, __entry->msg, __entry->step, __entry->window,
+		  __entry->bg, __entry->normal, __entry->max)
+);
+
+/**
+ * wbt_timer - trace wb timer event
+ * @status: timer state status
+ * @step: the current scale step count
+ * @inflight: tracked writes inflight
+ */
+TRACE_EVENT(wbt_timer,
+
+	TP_PROTO(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned int status,
+		 int step, unsigned int inflight),
+
+	TP_ARGS(bdi, status, step, inflight),
+
+	TP_STRUCT__entry(
+		__array(char, name, 32)
+		__field(unsigned int, status)
+		__field(int, step)
+		__field(unsigned int, inflight)
+	),
+
+	TP_fast_assign(
+		strncpy(__entry->name, dev_name(bdi->dev), 32);
+		__entry->status		= status;
+		__entry->step		= step;
+		__entry->inflight	= inflight;
+	),
+
+	TP_printk("%s: status=%u, step=%d, inflight=%u\n", __entry->name,
+		  __entry->status, __entry->step, __entry->inflight)
+);
+
+#endif /* _TRACE_WBT_H */
+
+/* This part must be outside protection */
+#include <trace/define_trace.h>