From 9dedf60313fa4dddfd5b9b226a0ef12a512bf9dc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Shaohua Li Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:03:53 +1000 Subject: md/raid1: read balance chooses idlest disk for SSD SSD hasn't spindle, distance between requests means nothing. And the original distance based algorithm sometimes can cause severe performance issue for SSD raid. Considering two thread groups, one accesses file A, the other access file B. The first group will access one disk and the second will access the other disk, because requests are near from one group and far between groups. In this case, read balance might keep one disk very busy but the other relative idle. For SSD, we should try best to distribute requests to as many disks as possible. There isn't spindle move penality anyway. With below patch, I can see more than 50% throughput improvement sometimes depending on workloads. The only exception is small requests can be merged to a big request which typically can drive higher throughput for SSD too. Such small requests are sequential reads. Unlike hard disk, sequential read which can't be merged (for example direct IO, or read without readahead) can be ignored for SSD. Again there is no spindle move penality. readahead dispatches small requests and such requests can be merged. Last patch can help detect sequential read well, at least if concurrent read number isn't greater than raid disk number. In that case, distance based algorithm doesn't work well too. V2: For hard disk and SSD mixed raid, doesn't use distance based algorithm for random IO too. This makes the algorithm generic for raid with SSD. Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li Signed-off-by: NeilBrown diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c index fb96c0c..d9869f2 100644 --- a/drivers/md/raid1.c +++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c @@ -497,9 +497,11 @@ static int read_balance(struct r1conf *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio, int *max_sect const sector_t this_sector = r1_bio->sector; int sectors; int best_good_sectors; - int best_disk; + int best_disk, best_dist_disk, best_pending_disk; + int has_nonrot_disk; int disk; sector_t best_dist; + unsigned int min_pending; struct md_rdev *rdev; int choose_first; @@ -512,8 +514,12 @@ static int read_balance(struct r1conf *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio, int *max_sect retry: sectors = r1_bio->sectors; best_disk = -1; + best_dist_disk = -1; best_dist = MaxSector; + best_pending_disk = -1; + min_pending = UINT_MAX; best_good_sectors = 0; + has_nonrot_disk = 0; if (conf->mddev->recovery_cp < MaxSector && (this_sector + sectors >= conf->next_resync)) @@ -525,6 +531,7 @@ static int read_balance(struct r1conf *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio, int *max_sect sector_t dist; sector_t first_bad; int bad_sectors; + unsigned int pending; rdev = rcu_dereference(conf->mirrors[disk].rdev); if (r1_bio->bios[disk] == IO_BLOCKED @@ -583,22 +590,43 @@ static int read_balance(struct r1conf *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio, int *max_sect } else best_good_sectors = sectors; + has_nonrot_disk |= blk_queue_nonrot(bdev_get_queue(rdev->bdev)); + pending = atomic_read(&rdev->nr_pending); dist = abs(this_sector - conf->mirrors[disk].head_position); if (choose_first /* Don't change to another disk for sequential reads */ || conf->mirrors[disk].next_seq_sect == this_sector || dist == 0 /* If device is idle, use it */ - || atomic_read(&rdev->nr_pending) == 0) { + || pending == 0) { best_disk = disk; break; } + + if (min_pending > pending) { + min_pending = pending; + best_pending_disk = disk; + } + if (dist < best_dist) { best_dist = dist; - best_disk = disk; + best_dist_disk = disk; } } + /* + * If all disks are rotational, choose the closest disk. If any disk is + * non-rotational, choose the disk with less pending request even the + * disk is rotational, which might/might not be optimal for raids with + * mixed ratation/non-rotational disks depending on workload. + */ + if (best_disk == -1) { + if (has_nonrot_disk) + best_disk = best_pending_disk; + else + best_disk = best_dist_disk; + } + if (best_disk >= 0) { rdev = rcu_dereference(conf->mirrors[best_disk].rdev); if (!rdev) -- cgit v0.10.2