On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Dave Chinner [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 09:32:13PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Dave Chinner [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 09:11:01PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 04:38:12PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

quoted

quoted

It would be better to write zeros to it, so we aren't measuring the
cost of the unwritten->written conversion.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, how hard would it be to defer
this part until writeback?

Part of the work has to be done at write time because we need to
update allocation statistics (i.e., so that we don't have ENOSPC
problems).  The unwritten->written conversion does happen at writeback
(as does the actual block allocation if we are doing delayed
allocation).

The point is that if the goal is to measure page fault scalability, we
shouldn't have this other stuff happening as the same time as the page
fault workload.

Sure, but the real problem is not the block mapping or allocation
path - even if the test is changed to take that out of the picture,
we still have timestamp updates being done on every single page
fault. ext4, XFS and btrfs all do transactional timestamp updates
and have nanosecond granularity, so every page fault is resulting in
a transaction to update the timestamp of the file being modified.

I have (unmergeable) patches to fix this:

http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/92476

The big problem with this approach is that not doing the
timestamp update on page faults is going to break the inode change
version counting because for ext4, btrfs and XFS it takes a
transaction to bump that counter. NFS needs to know the moment a
file is changed in memory, not when it is written to disk. Also, NFS
requires the change to the counter to be persistent over server
failures, so it needs to be changed as part of a transaction....

I've been running a kernel that has the file_update_time call
commented out for over a year now, and the only problem I've seen is
that the timestamp doesn't get updated :)

I think I must be misunderstanding you (or vice versa).  I'm currently
redoing the patches, and this time I'll do it for just the mm core and
ext4.  The only change I'm proposing to ext4's page_mkwrite is to
remove the file_update_time call.  Instead, ext4 will call
file_update_time on munmap, exit, MS_ASYNC, and at the end of
writepages.  Unless I'm missing something, there's no need to
unconditionally start a transaction on page_mkwrite (and there had
better not be, because file_update_time won't start a transaction if
the time doesn't change).

NFS can do whatever it wants, although I suspect that even NFS can get
away with deferring cmtime updates.

--Andy

IOWs, fixing the "filesystems need a transaction on each page_mkwrite
call" problem isn't as simple as changing how timestamps are
updated.

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

-- 
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs