linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@google.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 4/5] mm/readahead: Store folio order in struct file_ra_state
Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 12:08:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c8f78fd6-c1fb-4884-b370-cb6b03e573b6@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250430145920.3748738-5-ryan.roberts@arm.com>

On 30.04.25 16:59, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> Previously the folio order of the previous readahead request was
> inferred from the folio who's readahead marker was hit. But due to the
> way we have to round to non-natural boundaries sometimes, this first
> folio in the readahead block is often smaller than the preferred order
> for that request. This means that for cases where the initial sync
> readahead is poorly aligned, the folio order will ramp up much more
> slowly.
> 
> So instead, let's store the order in struct file_ra_state so we are not
> affected by any required alignment. We previously made enough room in
> the struct for a 16 order field. This should be plenty big enough since
> we are limited to MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER anyway, which is certainly never
> larger than ~20.
> 
> Since we now pass order in struct file_ra_state, page_cache_ra_order()
> no longer needs it's new_order parameter, so let's remove that.
> 
> Worked example:
> 
> Here we are touching pages 17-256 sequentially just as we did in the
> previous commit, but now that we are remembering the preferred order
> explicitly, we no longer have the slow ramp up problem. Note
> specifically that we no longer have 2 rounds (2x ~128K) of order-2
> folios:
> 
> TYPE    STARTOFFS     ENDOFFS        SIZE  STARTPG    ENDPG   NRPG  ORDER  RA
> -----  ----------  ----------  ----------  -------  -------  -----  -----  --
> HOLE   0x00000000  0x00001000        4096        0        1      1
> FOLIO  0x00001000  0x00002000        4096        1        2      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00002000  0x00003000        4096        2        3      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00003000  0x00004000        4096        3        4      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00004000  0x00005000        4096        4        5      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00005000  0x00006000        4096        5        6      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00006000  0x00007000        4096        6        7      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00007000  0x00008000        4096        7        8      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00008000  0x00009000        4096        8        9      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00009000  0x0000a000        4096        9       10      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0000a000  0x0000b000        4096       10       11      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0000b000  0x0000c000        4096       11       12      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0000c000  0x0000d000        4096       12       13      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0000d000  0x0000e000        4096       13       14      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0000e000  0x0000f000        4096       14       15      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0000f000  0x00010000        4096       15       16      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00010000  0x00011000        4096       16       17      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00011000  0x00012000        4096       17       18      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00012000  0x00013000        4096       18       19      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00013000  0x00014000        4096       19       20      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00014000  0x00015000        4096       20       21      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00015000  0x00016000        4096       21       22      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00016000  0x00017000        4096       22       23      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00017000  0x00018000        4096       23       24      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00018000  0x00019000        4096       24       25      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00019000  0x0001a000        4096       25       26      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0001a000  0x0001b000        4096       26       27      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0001b000  0x0001c000        4096       27       28      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0001c000  0x0001d000        4096       28       29      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0001d000  0x0001e000        4096       29       30      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0001e000  0x0001f000        4096       30       31      1      0
> FOLIO  0x0001f000  0x00020000        4096       31       32      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00020000  0x00021000        4096       32       33      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00021000  0x00022000        4096       33       34      1      0
> FOLIO  0x00022000  0x00024000        8192       34       36      2      1
> FOLIO  0x00024000  0x00028000       16384       36       40      4      2
> FOLIO  0x00028000  0x0002c000       16384       40       44      4      2
> FOLIO  0x0002c000  0x00030000       16384       44       48      4      2
> FOLIO  0x00030000  0x00034000       16384       48       52      4      2
> FOLIO  0x00034000  0x00038000       16384       52       56      4      2
> FOLIO  0x00038000  0x0003c000       16384       56       60      4      2
> FOLIO  0x0003c000  0x00040000       16384       60       64      4      2
> FOLIO  0x00040000  0x00050000       65536       64       80     16      4
> FOLIO  0x00050000  0x00060000       65536       80       96     16      4
> FOLIO  0x00060000  0x00080000      131072       96      128     32      5
> FOLIO  0x00080000  0x000a0000      131072      128      160     32      5
> FOLIO  0x000a0000  0x000c0000      131072      160      192     32      5
> FOLIO  0x000c0000  0x000e0000      131072      192      224     32      5
> FOLIO  0x000e0000  0x00100000      131072      224      256     32      5
> FOLIO  0x00100000  0x00120000      131072      256      288     32      5
> FOLIO  0x00120000  0x00140000      131072      288      320     32      5  Y
> HOLE   0x00140000  0x00800000     7077888      320     2048   1728
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
> ---
>   include/linux/fs.h |  2 ++
>   mm/filemap.c       |  6 ++++--
>   mm/internal.h      |  3 +--
>   mm/readahead.c     | 18 +++++++++++-------
>   4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 44362bef0010..cde482a7270a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -1031,6 +1031,7 @@ struct fown_struct {
>    *      and so were/are genuinely "ahead".  Start next readahead when
>    *      the first of these pages is accessed.
>    * @ra_pages: Maximum size of a readahead request, copied from the bdi.
> + * @order: Preferred folio order used for most recent readahead.

Looking at other members, and how it relates to the other members, 
should we call this something like "ra_prev_order" / "prev_ra_order" to 
distinguish it from !ra members and indicate the "most recent" semantics 
similar to "prev_pos"?

Just a thought while digging through this patch ...

...

> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -3222,7 +3222,8 @@ static struct file *do_sync_mmap_readahead(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>   		if (!(vm_flags & VM_RAND_READ))
>   			ra->size *= 2;
>   		ra->async_size = HPAGE_PMD_NR;
> -		page_cache_ra_order(&ractl, ra, HPAGE_PMD_ORDER);
> +		ra->order = HPAGE_PMD_ORDER;
> +		page_cache_ra_order(&ractl, ra);
>   		return fpin;
>   	}
>   #endif
> @@ -3258,8 +3259,9 @@ static struct file *do_sync_mmap_readahead(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>   	ra->start = max_t(long, 0, vmf->pgoff - ra->ra_pages / 2);
>   	ra->size = ra->ra_pages;
>   	ra->async_size = ra->ra_pages / 4;
> +	ra->order = 0;
>   	ractl._index = ra->start;
> -	page_cache_ra_order(&ractl, ra, 0);
> +	page_cache_ra_order(&ractl, ra);
>   	return fpin;
>   }

Why not let page_cache_ra_order() consume the order and update ra->order 
(or however it will be called :) ) internally?

That might make at least the "most recent readahead" semantics of the 
variable clearer.

Again, just a thought ...

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb



  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-05-05 10:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-30 14:59 [RFC PATCH v4 0/5] Readahead tweaks for larger folios Ryan Roberts
2025-04-30 14:59 ` [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] mm/readahead: Honour new_order in page_cache_ra_order() Ryan Roberts
2025-05-05  8:49   ` Jan Kara
2025-05-05  9:51   ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-05 10:09     ` Jan Kara
2025-05-05 10:25       ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-05 12:51         ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-05 16:14           ` Jan Kara
2025-05-05 10:09   ` Anshuman Khandual
2025-05-05 13:00     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-08 12:55   ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2025-05-09 13:30     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-09 20:50       ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2025-05-13 12:33         ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-13  6:19   ` Chaitanya S Prakash
2025-04-30 14:59 ` [RFC PATCH v4 2/5] mm/readahead: Terminate async readahead on natural boundary Ryan Roberts
2025-05-05  9:13   ` Jan Kara
2025-05-05  9:37     ` Jan Kara
2025-05-06  9:28       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-06 11:29         ` Jan Kara
2025-05-06 15:31           ` Ryan Roberts
2025-04-30 14:59 ` [RFC PATCH v4 3/5] mm/readahead: Make space in struct file_ra_state Ryan Roberts
2025-05-05  9:39   ` Jan Kara
2025-05-05  9:57   ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-09 10:00   ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2025-04-30 14:59 ` [RFC PATCH v4 4/5] mm/readahead: Store folio order " Ryan Roberts
2025-05-05  9:52   ` Jan Kara
2025-05-06  9:53     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-06 10:45       ` Jan Kara
2025-05-05 10:08   ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2025-05-06 10:03     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-06 14:24       ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-06 15:06         ` Ryan Roberts
2025-04-30 14:59 ` [RFC PATCH v4 5/5] mm/filemap: Allow arch to request folio size for exec memory Ryan Roberts
2025-05-05 10:06   ` Jan Kara
2025-05-09 13:52   ` Will Deacon
2025-05-13 12:46     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-14 15:14       ` Will Deacon
2025-05-14 15:31         ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-06 10:05 ` [RFC PATCH v4 0/5] Readahead tweaks for larger folios Ryan Roberts

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=c8f78fd6-c1fb-4884-b370-cb6b03e573b6@redhat.com \
    --to=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=kaleshsingh@google.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=ziy@nvidia.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