All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, XFS <xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>,
	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm: vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:34:49 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110713233449.GU23038@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1310567487-15367-2-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de>

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 03:31:23PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
> 
> When kswapd is failing to keep zones above the min watermark, a process
> will enter direct reclaim in the same manner kswapd does. If a dirty
> page is encountered during the scan, this page is written to backing
> storage using mapping->writepage.
> 
> This causes two problems. First, it can result in very deep call
> stacks, particularly if the target storage or filesystem are complex.
> Some filesystems ignore write requests from direct reclaim as a result.
> The second is that a single-page flush is inefficient in terms of IO.
> While there is an expectation that the elevator will merge requests,
> this does not always happen. Quoting Christoph Hellwig;
> 
> 	The elevator has a relatively small window it can operate on,
> 	and can never fix up a bad large scale writeback pattern.
> 
> This patch prevents direct reclaim writing back filesystem pages by
> checking if current is kswapd. Anonymous pages are still written to
> swap as there is not the equivalent of a flusher thread for anonymos
> pages. If the dirty pages cannot be written back, they are placed
> back on the LRU lists.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>

Ok, so that makes the .writepage checks in ext4, xfs and btrfs for this
condition redundant. In effect the patch should be a no-op for those
filesystems. Can you also remove the checks in the filesystems?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, XFS <xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm: vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:34:49 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110713233449.GU23038@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1310567487-15367-2-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de>

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 03:31:23PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
> 
> When kswapd is failing to keep zones above the min watermark, a process
> will enter direct reclaim in the same manner kswapd does. If a dirty
> page is encountered during the scan, this page is written to backing
> storage using mapping->writepage.
> 
> This causes two problems. First, it can result in very deep call
> stacks, particularly if the target storage or filesystem are complex.
> Some filesystems ignore write requests from direct reclaim as a result.
> The second is that a single-page flush is inefficient in terms of IO.
> While there is an expectation that the elevator will merge requests,
> this does not always happen. Quoting Christoph Hellwig;
> 
> 	The elevator has a relatively small window it can operate on,
> 	and can never fix up a bad large scale writeback pattern.
> 
> This patch prevents direct reclaim writing back filesystem pages by
> checking if current is kswapd. Anonymous pages are still written to
> swap as there is not the equivalent of a flusher thread for anonymos
> pages. If the dirty pages cannot be written back, they are placed
> back on the LRU lists.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>

Ok, so that makes the .writepage checks in ext4, xfs and btrfs for this
condition redundant. In effect the patch should be a no-op for those
filesystems. Can you also remove the checks in the filesystems?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

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

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, XFS <xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>,
	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm: vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:34:49 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110713233449.GU23038@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1310567487-15367-2-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de>

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 03:31:23PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
> 
> When kswapd is failing to keep zones above the min watermark, a process
> will enter direct reclaim in the same manner kswapd does. If a dirty
> page is encountered during the scan, this page is written to backing
> storage using mapping->writepage.
> 
> This causes two problems. First, it can result in very deep call
> stacks, particularly if the target storage or filesystem are complex.
> Some filesystems ignore write requests from direct reclaim as a result.
> The second is that a single-page flush is inefficient in terms of IO.
> While there is an expectation that the elevator will merge requests,
> this does not always happen. Quoting Christoph Hellwig;
> 
> 	The elevator has a relatively small window it can operate on,
> 	and can never fix up a bad large scale writeback pattern.
> 
> This patch prevents direct reclaim writing back filesystem pages by
> checking if current is kswapd. Anonymous pages are still written to
> swap as there is not the equivalent of a flusher thread for anonymos
> pages. If the dirty pages cannot be written back, they are placed
> back on the LRU lists.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>

Ok, so that makes the .writepage checks in ext4, xfs and btrfs for this
condition redundant. In effect the patch should be a no-op for those
filesystems. Can you also remove the checks in the filesystems?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-13 23:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 114+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-07-13 14:31 [RFC PATCH 0/5] Reduce filesystem writeback from page reclaim (again) Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31 ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31 ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm: vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 23:34   ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2011-07-13 23:34     ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-13 23:34     ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  6:17     ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  6:17       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  6:17       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  1:38   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14  1:38     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14  1:38     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14  4:46     ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14  4:46       ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14  4:46       ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14  4:46       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14  4:46         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14  4:46         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14 15:07         ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14 15:07           ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14 15:07           ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14 23:55           ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14 23:55             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14 23:55             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-15  2:22         ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-15  2:22           ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-15  2:22           ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-18  2:22           ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-18  2:22             ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-18  2:22             ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-18  3:06             ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-18  3:06               ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-18  3:06               ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  6:19     ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  6:19       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  6:19       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  6:17       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14  6:17         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-14  6:17         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-07-13 14:31 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in kswapd except in high priority Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 23:37   ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-13 23:37     ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-13 23:37     ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  6:29     ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  6:29       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  6:29       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14 11:52       ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14 11:52         ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14 11:52         ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14 13:17         ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14 13:17           ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14 13:17           ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-15  3:12           ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-15  3:12             ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-15  3:12             ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-13 14:31 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm: vmscan: Throttle reclaim if encountering too many dirty pages under writeback Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 23:41   ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-13 23:41     ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-13 23:41     ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  6:33     ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  6:33       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  6:33       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm: vmscan: Immediately reclaim end-of-LRU dirty pages when writeback completes Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 16:40   ` Johannes Weiner
2011-07-13 16:40     ` Johannes Weiner
2011-07-13 16:40     ` Johannes Weiner
2011-07-13 17:15     ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 17:15       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 17:15       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm: writeback: Prioritise dirty inodes encountered by direct reclaim for background flushing Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 14:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 21:39   ` Jan Kara
2011-07-13 21:39     ` Jan Kara
2011-07-13 21:39     ` Jan Kara
2011-07-14  0:09     ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  0:09       ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  0:09       ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  7:03     ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  7:03       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  7:03       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 23:56   ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-13 23:56     ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-13 23:56     ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  7:30     ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  7:30       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  7:30       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14 15:09   ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14 15:09     ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14 15:09     ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14 15:49     ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14 15:49       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14 15:49       ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 15:31 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] Reduce filesystem writeback from page reclaim (again) Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 15:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-13 15:31   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  0:33 ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  0:33   ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  0:33   ` Dave Chinner
2011-07-14  4:51   ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14  4:51     ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14  4:51     ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-14  7:37   ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  7:37     ` Mel Gorman
2011-07-14  7:37     ` Mel Gorman

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=20110713233449.GU23038@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jweiner@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.