From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0562AC2BA19 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 07:44:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFBE2206F8 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 07:44:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1586159098; bh=VcgV/eWG/axVBlX9tQrumU8VUmhJxKB36JaQLOo37fM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=ESudkdbI+qv+31FpRwJbJllVj5fNX+fFJtKibTmEysqmKIw6Y+4iyIrpP1i7kfkXt vxSqtkx0QtTvZOCexRmV+8n7oPJWhLE2LOCqzL9SsX5DybgT1I5rl2zXN70o+7ZkFD 18LJGdcEUVZSQUEfskaWZrjr8j+fYLEoU0YAiNoY= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726609AbgDFHo5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2020 03:44:57 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f68.google.com ([209.85.128.68]:53402 "EHLO mail-wm1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726475AbgDFHo5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2020 03:44:57 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f68.google.com with SMTP id d77so13625468wmd.3; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 00:44:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=txWInbuQbmkgFxJ+50xnQXLhTEQvs1Jqq2HY6J0OmlU=; b=QoMOsFRiahP6Pg7Gai160asclW5Lzm+ToLoPpt83KcHbhU8hT/5CXufMx2snTIuvvo Bsc5BQSEWDlAM8SoqvgXx4Az+95SK3L4nhqt5pORwyNvxLA47FGtnUAhAMcnrCu6H6Oh NiGULMv/F5QmibD+1EYA3bMVgxW57vO5ro87zGcipVesoI82bWOR7H5f8/z7U37Mgy9p NDaDpYzrfnrElIr1BBWag9VSJbOvMbjj5He8pjXtJGsL0nqV2ifdZ6G7ylVpRWJZk8cd Wv2YIZEg6lIyT4I67M7nIbFQ3cwnNzWR7x/w107ic1QkZP0V7YbwwM+XQc0Mv74KGaEN Pdjg== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuY39d+/iEHlQptkN8JxnbrQpIhZR8k++XgbTe35tgZI/RHge60A qNbTJmIJ99sqqtdDDkCNxts= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJ/uoIUR+40nexUPOLJDWAC+iVUJJZll3wmjJET1u6SyNHZsHCm9tunzpCMG0peDimrSZlprA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:bd8b:: with SMTP id n133mr10454476wmf.175.1586159095092; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 00:44:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-37-188-180-223.eurotel.cz. [37.188.180.223]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q11sm24372569wme.0.2020.04.06.00.44.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 06 Apr 2020 00:44:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 09:44:53 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: NeilBrown Cc: Trond Myklebust , "Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com" , Andrew Morton , Jan Kara , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] MM: replace PF_LESS_THROTTLE with PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE Message-ID: <20200406074453.GH19426@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <87tv2b7q72.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <87v9miydai.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <87sghmyd8v.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <20200403151534.GG22681@dhcp22.suse.cz> <878sjcxn7i.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <878sjcxn7i.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat 04-04-20 08:40:17, Neil Brown wrote: > On Fri, Apr 03 2020, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Thu 02-04-20 10:53:20, Neil Brown wrote: > >> > >> PF_LESS_THROTTLE exists for loop-back nfsd, and a similar need in the > >> loop block driver, where a daemon needs to write to one bdi in > >> order to free up writes queued to another bdi. > >> > >> The daemon sets PF_LESS_THROTTLE and gets a larger allowance of dirty > >> pages, so that it can still dirty pages after other processses have been > >> throttled. > >> > >> This approach was designed when all threads were blocked equally, > >> independently on which device they were writing to, or how fast it was. > >> Since that time the writeback algorithm has changed substantially with > >> different threads getting different allowances based on non-trivial > >> heuristics. This means the simple "add 25%" heuristic is no longer > >> reliable. > >> > >> This patch changes the heuristic to ignore the global limits and > >> consider only the limit relevant to the bdi being written to. This > >> approach is already available for BDI_CAP_STRICTLIMIT users (fuse) and > >> should not introduce surprises. This has the desired result of > >> protecting the task from the consequences of large amounts of dirty data > >> queued for other devices. > > > > While I understand that you want to have per bdi throttling for those > > "special" files I am still missing how this is going to provide the > > additional room that the additnal 25% gave them previously. I might > > misremember or things have changed (what you mention as non-trivial > > heuristics) but PF_LESS_THROTTLE really needed that room to guarantee a > > forward progress. Care to expan some more on how this is handled now? > > Maybe we do not need it anymore but calling that out explicitly would be > > really helpful. > > The 25% was a means to an end, not an end in itself. > > The problem is that the NFS server needs to be able to write to the > backing filesystem when the dirty memory limits have been reached by > being totally consumed by dirty pages on the NFS filesystem. > > The 25% was just a way of giving an allowance of dirty pages to nfsd > that could not be consumed by processes writing to an NFS filesystem. > i.e. it doesn't need 25% MORE, it needs 25% PRIVATELY. Actually it only > really needs 1 page privately, but a few pages give better throughput > and 25% seemed like a good idea at the time. Yes this part is clear to me. > per-bdi throttling focuses on the "PRIVATELY" (the important bit) and > de-emphasises the 25% (the irrelevant detail). It is still not clear to me how this patch is going to behave when the global dirty throttling is essentially equal to the per-bdi - e.g. there is only a single bdi and now the PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE process doesn't have anything private. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs