On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 08:40:12PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> >From e5c6600d01c4462c4e1ee0c70ec1d9319862077d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Chao Yu <chao2...@samsung.com>
> Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 18:52:46 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: reduce lock overhead of extent node releasing
> 
> Open and close critical section for each extent node when traversing rb-tree
> results in high overhead of cpu, slows thing down.
> 
> This patch alternates to batch mode for removing extent nodes under spin lock.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao2...@samsung.com>
> ---
>  fs/f2fs/data.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> index 6a706dd..7fb56a0 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> @@ -441,19 +441,31 @@ static unsigned int __free_extent_tree(struct 
> f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>       struct extent_node *en;
>       unsigned int count = et->count;
>  
> -     node = rb_first(&et->root);
> -     while (node) {
> -             next = rb_next(node);
> -             en = rb_entry(node, struct extent_node, rb_node);
> +     if (!et->count)
> +             return 0;
> +
> +     /* 1. remove all extent nodes in global lru list */
> +     if (free_all) {
> +             spin_lock(&sbi->extent_lock);
> +             node = rb_first(&et->root);
> +             while (node) {
> +                     next = rb_next(node);
> +                     en = rb_entry(node, struct extent_node, rb_node);
>  
> -             if (free_all) {
> -                     spin_lock(&sbi->extent_lock);
>                       if (!list_empty(&en->list))
>                               list_del_init(&en->list);
> -                     spin_unlock(&sbi->extent_lock);
> +                     node = next;
>               }
> +             spin_unlock(&sbi->extent_lock);
> +     }
> +
> +     /* 2. release all extent nodes which are not in global lru list */

Hmm,
Is there any overhead to traverse the rb_tree twice and any spin_lock delay
caused by contention?

Thanks,

> +     node = rb_first(&et->root);
> +     while (node) {
> +             next = rb_next(node);
> +             en = rb_entry(node, struct extent_node, rb_node);
>  
> -             if (free_all || list_empty(&en->list)) {
> +             if (list_empty(&en->list)) {
>                       __detach_extent_node(sbi, et, en);
>                       kmem_cache_free(extent_node_slab, en);
>               }
> -- 
> 2.4.2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to