From: Tang Junhui <tang.jun...@zte.com.cn> Hello Mike,
I thought twice, and feel this patch is a little complex and still not very accurate for small backend devices. I think we can resolve it like this: uint64_t cache_dirty_target = div_u64(cache_sectors * dc->writeback_percent, 100); - int64_t target = div64_u64(cache_dirty_target * bdev_sectors(dc->bdev), - c->cached_dev_sectors); + int64_t target = div64_u64(cache_dirty_target, + div64_u64(c->cached_dev_sectors, bdev_sectors(dc->bdev))); c->cached_dev_sectors is always bigger than bdev_sectors(dc->bdev), so div64_u64(c->cached_dev_sectors, bdev_sectors(dc->bdev) would be never smaller than 1, and this expression has no multiplication operation, so we do not need to worry about overflows. we also can multiply a value(2^10) to avoid loss of accuracy in division like bellow: (it would support all device smaller than 2^54 BYTE). + int64_t target = div64_u64(cache_dirty_target<<10, + div64_u64(c->cached_dev_sectors<<10, bdev_sectors(dc->bdev))); How do you think about? > Bcache needs to scale the dirty data in the cache over the multiple > backing disks in order to calculate writeback rates for each. > The previous code did this by multiplying the target number of dirty > sectors by the backing device size, and expected it to fit into a > uint64_t; this blows up on relatively small backing devices. > > The new approach figures out the bdev's share in 16384ths of the overall > cached data. This is chosen to cope well when bdevs drastically vary in > size and to ensure that bcache can cross the petabyte boundary for each > backing device. > > This has been improved based on Tang Junhui's feedback to ensure that > every device gets a share of dirty data, no matter how small it is > compared to the total backing pool. > > Reported-by: Jack Douglas <j...@douglastechnology.co.uk> > Signed-off-by: Michael Lyle <ml...@lyle.org> > --- > drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c b/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c > index 61f24c04cebd..c7e35180091e 100644 > --- a/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c > +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c > @@ -18,17 +18,43 @@ > #include <trace/events/bcache.h> > > /* Rate limiting */ > - > -static void __update_writeback_rate(struct cached_dev *dc) > +static uint64_t __calc_target_rate(struct cached_dev *dc) > { > struct cache_set *c = dc->disk.c; > + > + /* > + * This is the size of the cache, minus the amount used for > + * flash-only devices > + */ > uint64_t cache_sectors = c->nbuckets * c->sb.bucket_size - > bcache_flash_devs_sectors_dirty(c); > + > + /* > + * Unfortunately there is no control of global dirty data. If the > + * user states that they want 10% dirty data in the cache, and has, > + * e.g., 5 backing volumes of equal size, we try and ensure each > + * backing volume uses about 2% of the cache. > + * > + * 16384 is chosen here as something that each backing device should > + * be a reasonable fraction of the share, and not to blow up until > + * individual backing devices are a petabyte. > + */ > + uint32_t bdev_share_per16k = > + div64_u64(16384 * bdev_sectors(dc->bdev), > + c->cached_dev_sectors); > + > uint64_t cache_dirty_target = > div_u64(cache_sectors * dc->writeback_percent, 100); > - int64_t target = div64_u64(cache_dirty_target * bdev_sectors(dc->bdev), > - c->cached_dev_sectors); > > + /* Ensure each backing dev gets at least 1/16384th dirty share */ > + if (bdev_share_per16k < 1) > + bdev_share_per16k = 1; > + > + return div_u64(cache_dirty_target * bdev_share_per16k, 16384); > +} > + > +static void __update_writeback_rate(struct cached_dev *dc) > +{ > /* > * PI controller: > * Figures out the amount that should be written per second. > @@ -49,6 +75,7 @@ static void __update_writeback_rate(struct cached_dev *dc) > * This acts as a slow, long-term average that is not subject to > * variations in usage like the p term. > */ > + int64_t target = __calc_target_rate(dc); > int64_t dirty = bcache_dev_sectors_dirty(&dc->disk); > int64_t error = dirty - target; > int64_t proportional_scaled = > -- > 2.14.1 Thanks, Tang Junhui