From: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
To: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>, "Lance Yang" <ioworker0@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
josef@toxicpanda.com, tj@kernel.org,
fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
a.hindborg@samsung.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it,
axboe@kernel.dk, vbabka@kernel.org, david@redhat.com,
21cnbao@gmail.com, baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com,
libang.li@antgroup.com, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] cgroupv2/blk: inconsistent I/O behavior in Cgroup v2 with set device wbps and wiops
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 09:37:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9ede36af-fca4-ed41-6b7e-cef157c640bb@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <zjbn575huc6pk7jpv2ipoayfk4bvfu5z5imb5muk5drksa7p3q@xcr5imtt4zro>
Hi,
在 2024/08/12 23:43, Michal Koutný 写道:
> +Cc Kuai
>
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 11:00:30PM GMT, Lance Yang <ioworker0@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've run into a problem with Cgroup v2 where it doesn't seem to correctly limit
>> I/O operations when I set both wbps and wiops for a device. However, if I only
>> set wbps, then everything works as expected.
>>
>> To reproduce the problem, we can follow these command-based steps:
>>
>> 1. **System Information:**
>> - Kernel Version and OS Release:
>> ```
>> $ uname -r
>> 6.10.0-rc5+
>>
>> $ cat /etc/os-release
>> PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu 24.04 LTS"
>> NAME="Ubuntu"
>> VERSION_ID="24.04"
>> VERSION="24.04 LTS (Noble Numbat)"
>> VERSION_CODENAME=noble
>> ID=ubuntu
>> ID_LIKE=debian
>> HOME_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/"
>> SUPPORT_URL="https://help.ubuntu.com/"
>> BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/"
>> PRIVACY_POLICY_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/privacy-policy"
>> UBUNTU_CODENAME=noble
>> LOGO=ubuntu-logo
>> ```
>>
>> 2. **Device Information and Settings:**
>> - List Block Devices and Scheduler:
>> ```
>> $ lsblk
>> NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINTS
>> sda 8:0 0 4.4T 0 disk
>> └─sda1 8:1 0 4.4T 0 part /data
>> ...
>>
>> $ cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler
>> none [mq-deadline] kyber bfq
>>
>> $ cat /sys/block/sda/queue/rotational
>> 1
>> ```
>>
>> 3. **Reproducing the problem:**
>> - Navigate to the cgroup v2 filesystem and configure I/O settings:
>> ```
>> $ cd /sys/fs/cgroup/
>> $ stat -fc %T /sys/fs/cgroup
>> cgroup2fs
>> $ mkdir test
>> $ echo "8:0 wbps=10485760 wiops=100000" > io.max
>> ```
>> In this setup:
>> wbps=10485760 sets the write bytes per second limit to 10 MB/s.
>> wiops=100000 sets the write I/O operations per second limit to 100,000.
>>
>> - Add process to the cgroup and verify:
>> ```
>> $ echo $$ > cgroup.procs
>> $ cat cgroup.procs
>> 3826771
>> 3828513
>> $ ps -ef|grep 3826771
>> root 3826771 3826768 0 22:04 pts/1 00:00:00 -bash
>> root 3828761 3826771 0 22:06 pts/1 00:00:00 ps -ef
>> root 3828762 3826771 0 22:06 pts/1 00:00:00 grep --color=auto 3826771
>> ```
>>
>> - Observe I/O performance using `dd` commands and `iostat`:
>> ```
>> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/data/file1 bs=512M count=1 &
>> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/data/file1 bs=512M count=1 &
You're testing buffer IO here, and I don't see that write back cgroup is
enabled. Is this test intentional? Why not test direct IO?
>> ```
>> ```
>> $ iostat -d 1 -h -y -p sda
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 7.00 0.0k 1.3M 0.0k 0.0k 1.3M 0.0k sda
>> 7.00 0.0k 1.3M 0.0k 0.0k 1.3M 0.0k sda1
>>
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 5.00 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k sda
>> 5.00 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k sda1
>>
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 21.00 0.0k 1.4M 0.0k 0.0k 1.4M 0.0k sda
>> 21.00 0.0k 1.4M 0.0k 0.0k 1.4M 0.0k sda1
>>
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 5.00 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k sda
>> 5.00 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k sda1
>>
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 5.00 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k sda
>> 5.00 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k 0.0k 1.2M 0.0k sda1
>>
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 1848.00 0.0k 448.1M 0.0k 0.0k 448.1M 0.0k sda
>> 1848.00 0.0k 448.1M 0.0k 0.0k 448.1M 0.0k sda1
Looks like all dirty buffer got flushed to disk at the last second while
the file is closed, this is expected.
>> ```
>> Initially, the write speed is slow (<2MB/s) then suddenly bursts to several
>> hundreds of MB/s.
>
> What it would be on average?
> IOW how long would the whole operation in throttled cgroup take?
>
>>
>> - Testing with wiops set to max:
>> ```
>> echo "8:0 wbps=10485760 wiops=max" > io.max
>> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/data/file1 bs=512M count=1 &
>> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/data/file1 bs=512M count=1 &
>> ```
>> ```
>> $ iostat -d 1 -h -y -p sda
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 48.00 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k sda
>> 48.00 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k sda1
>>
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 40.00 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k sda
>> 40.00 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k sda1
>>
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 41.00 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k sda
>> 41.00 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k sda1
>>
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 46.00 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k sda
>> 46.00 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k 0.0k 10.0M 0.0k sda1
>>
>>
>> tps kB_read/s kB_wrtn/s kB_dscd/s kB_read kB_wrtn kB_dscd Device
>> 55.00 0.0k 10.2M 0.0k 0.0k 10.2M 0.0k sda
>> 55.00 0.0k 10.2M 0.0k 0.0k 10.2M 0.0k sda1
And I don't this wiops=max is the reason, what need to explain is that
why dirty buffer got flushed to disk synchronously before the dd finish
and close the file?
>> ```
>> The iostat output shows the write operations as stabilizing at around 10 MB/s,
>> which aligns with the defined limit of 10 MB/s. After setting wiops to max, the
>> I/O limits appear to work as expected.
Can you give the direct IO a test? And also enable write back cgroup for
buffer IO.
Thanks,
Kuai
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lance
>
> Thanks for the report Lance. Is this something you started seeing after
> a kernel update or switch to cgroup v2? (Or you simply noticed with this
> setup only?)
>
>
> Michal
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-13 1:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-12 15:00 Lance Yang
2024-08-12 15:43 ` Michal Koutný
2024-08-13 1:37 ` Yu Kuai [this message]
2024-08-13 5:00 ` Lance Yang
2024-08-13 6:17 ` Lance Yang
2024-08-13 6:39 ` Yu Kuai
2024-08-13 7:19 ` Yu Kuai
2024-08-15 1:59 ` Lance Yang
2024-08-23 12:05 ` Lance Yang
2024-08-26 1:31 ` Yu Kuai
2024-08-26 2:15 ` Lance Yang
2024-08-23 12:19 ` Lance Yang
2024-08-13 5:11 ` Lance Yang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9ede36af-fca4-ed41-6b7e-cef157c640bb@huaweicloud.com \
--to=yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=21cnbao@gmail.com \
--cc=a.hindborg@samsung.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=libang.li@antgroup.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=paolo.valente@unimore.it \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox