今天曲山同学在线上问道:
我测试发现,如果cp一个文件,然后direct io读这个文件,会消耗很长时间。
我猜测dio不能用page cache,而这个文件cp以后都在cache里面,要强制刷到磁盘,才能读?
我cp这个文件很大,超过256M
由于数据文件默认是用bufferedio方式打开的,也就是说它的数据是先缓冲在pagecache里面的,写入的数据会导致大量的脏页,而且这部分数据如果内核内存不紧张的话,是一直放在内存里面的的。我们知道directio是直接旁路掉pagecache直接发起设备IO的,也就是说在发起IO之前要保证数据是先落地到介质去,所以如果文件比较大的话,这个时间会比较长。从pagecahce的回写行为我们可以知道,只要脏页的数量不超过总内存的10%, 我们的机器有4G的内存,所以2个100M的文件总共才200M,不会导致writeback发生,我们可以很顺利的观察到这个现象。
有了上面的分析,下面我们来重现下这个问题。以下是我的步骤:
$ uname -a
Linux rds064075.sqa.cm4 2.6.32-131.21.1.tb477.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Feb 23 14:24:55 CST 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
$ sudo sysctl vm.drop_caches=3
vm.drop_caches = 3
$ free -m && cat /proc/meminfo |grep -i dirty && time dd if=/dev/urandom of=test.dat count=6144 bs=16384 && free -m && cat /proc/meminfo |grep -i dirty && time dd if=test.dat of=/dev/null count=6144 bs=16384 && free -m && cat /proc/meminfo |grep -i dirty && time dd if=test.dat of=/dev/null count=6144 bs=16384 iflag=direct && free -m && cat /proc/meminfo |grep -i dirty
$ free -m && cat /proc/meminfo |grep -i dirty && time dd if=/dev/urandom of=test.dat count=6144 bs=16384 && free -m && cat /proc/meminfo |grep -i dirty && time dd if=test.dat of=/dev/null count=6144 bs=16384 && free -m && cat /proc/meminfo |grep -i dirty && time dd if=test.dat of=/dev/null count=6144 bs=16384 iflag=direct && free -m && cat /proc/meminfo |grep -i dirty
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 48262 22800 25461 0 3 42
-/+ buffers/cache: 22755 25507
Swap: 2047 2047 0
Dirty: 344 kB
6144+0 records in
6144+0 records out
100663296 bytes (101 MB) copied, 15.2308 s, 6.6 MB/s
real0m15.249s
user0m0.001s
sys0m15.228s
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 48262 22912 25350 0 3 139
-/+ buffers/cache: 22768 25493
Swap: 2047 2047 0
Dirty: 98556 kB
6144+0 records in
6144+0 records out
100663296 bytes (101 MB) copied, 0.028041 s, 3.6 GB/s
real0m0.029s
user0m0.000s
sys0m0.029s
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 48262 22912 25350 0 3 139
-/+ buffers/cache: 22768 25493
Swap: 2047 2047 0
Dirty: 98556 kB
6144+0 records in
6144+0 records out
100663296 bytes (101 MB) copied, 0.466601 s, 216 MB/s
real0m0.468s
user0m0.002s
sys0m0.101s
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 48262 22906 25356 0 3 140
-/+ buffers/cache: 22762 25500
Swap: 2047 2047 0
Dirty: 896 kB
从上面的实验,我们可以看出来我们的文件是101MB左右,脏页用了98544KB内存,在direct方式读后,文件占用的脏页被清洗掉了,脏页变成了80K, 但是这块数据还是留在了pagecache(140-39), 符合我们的预期。
接着我们从源码角度来分析下这个现象,我们知道VFS文件的读是从generic_file_aio_read发起的,而不管具体的文件系统是什么。
在文卿和三百的帮助下,我们不费吹灰之力就找到了源码位置,偷懒的方式如下:
$ stap -L 'kernel.function("generic_file_aio_read")'
kernel.function("generic_file_aio_read@mm/filemap.c:1331") $iocb:struct kiocb* $iov:struct iovec const* $nr_segs:long unsigned int $pos:loff_t $count:size_t
准备好emacs,我们来看下读代码的实现:
mm/filemap.c:1331
/**
* generic_file_aio_read - generic filesystem read routine
* @iocb: kernel I/O control block
* @iov: io vector request
* @nr_segs: number of segments in the iovec
* @pos: current file position
*
* This is the "read()" routine for all filesystems
* that can use the page cache directly.
*/
ssize_t
generic_file_aio_read(struct kiocb *iocb, const struct iovec *iov,
unsigned long nr_segs, loff_t pos)
{
/* coalesce the iovecs and go direct-to-BIO for O_DIRECT */
if (filp->f_flags & O_DIRECT) {
loff_t size;
struct address_space *mapping;
struct inode *inode;
mapping = filp->f_mapping;
inode = mapping->host;
if (!count)
goto out; /* skip atime */
size = i_size_read(inode);
if (pos < size) {
retval = filemap_write_and_wait_range(mapping, pos,
pos + iov_length(iov, nr_segs) - 1);
if (!retval) {
retval = mapping->a_ops->direct_IO(READ,
iocb,
iov, pos, nr_segs);
}
if (retval > 0) {
*ppos = pos + retval;
count -= retval;
}
/*
* Btrfs can have a short DIO read if we encounter
* compressed extents, so if there was an error,
or if
* we've already read everything we wanted to, or if
* there was a short read because we hit EOF, go
ahead
* and return. Otherwise fallthrough to
buffered io for
* the rest of the read.
*/
if (retval < 0 || !count || *ppos >= size) {
file_accessed(filp);
goto out;
}
}
}
源码很清楚的说:在directio方式下打开的文件,先要透过filemap_write_and_wait_range回写数据,才开始后面的IO读流程。
最后一步骤,我们再用stap来确认下我们之前的实验:
$ cat dwb.stp
global i;
probe kernel.function("filemap_write_and_wait_range") {
if (execname() != "dd") next;
print_backtrace();
println("===");
if (i++>2) exit();
}
$ sudo stap dwb.stp
0xffffffff8110e200 : filemap_write_and_wait_range+0x0/0x90 [kernel]
0xffffffff8110f278 : generic_file_aio_read+0x498/0x870 [kernel]
0xffffffff8117323a : do_sync_read+0xfa/0x140 [kernel]
0xffffffff81173c65 : vfs_read+0xb5/0x1a0 [kernel]
0xffffffff81173da1 : sys_read+0x51/0x90 [kernel]
0xffffffff8100b172 : system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b [kernel]
===
0xffffffff8110e200 : filemap_write_and_wait_range+0x0/0x90 [kernel]
0xffffffff811acbc8 : __blockdev_direct_IO+0x228/0xc40 [kernel]
0xffffffffa008a24a
===
0xffffffff8110e200 : filemap_write_and_wait_range+0x0/0x90 [kernel]
0xffffffff8110f278 : generic_file_aio_read+0x498/0x870 [kernel]
0xffffffff8117323a : do_sync_read+0xfa/0x140 [kernel]
0xffffffff81173c65 : vfs_read+0xb5/0x1a0 [kernel]
0xffffffff81173da1 : sys_read+0x51/0x90 [kernel]
0xffffffff8100b172 : system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b [kernel]
===
0xffffffff8110e200 : filemap_write_and_wait_range+0x0/0x90 [kernel]
0xffffffff811acbc8 : __blockdev_direct_IO+0x228/0xc40 [kernel]
0xffffffffa008a24a
===
filemap_write_and_wait_range的调用栈很清晰的暴露了一切!
小结:文件系统比较复杂,最好不要混用bufferedio和directio!
祝玩得开心!
Post Footer automatically generated by wp-posturl plugin for wordpress.