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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 66665C433DF for ; Sat, 23 May 2020 22:35:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BE8F20727 for ; Sat, 23 May 2020 22:35:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728488AbgEWWfo (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 May 2020 18:35:44 -0400 Received: from mail106.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.42]:36189 "EHLO mail106.syd.optusnet.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728414AbgEWWfo (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 May 2020 18:35:44 -0400 Received: from dread.disaster.area (pa49-195-157-175.pa.nsw.optusnet.com.au [49.195.157.175]) by mail106.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 406F65AAD8A; Sun, 24 May 2020 08:35:42 +1000 (AEST) Received: from dave by dread.disaster.area with local (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1jcck1-0000rT-PB; Sun, 24 May 2020 08:35:41 +1000 Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 08:35:41 +1000 From: Dave Chinner To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/24] xfs: allow multiple reclaimers per AG Message-ID: <20200523223541.GJ2040@dread.disaster.area> References: <20200522035029.3022405-1-david@fromorbit.com> <20200522035029.3022405-16-david@fromorbit.com> <20200522231007.GS8230@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200522231007.GS8230@magnolia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Optus-CM-Score: 0 X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=QIgWuTDL c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=ONQRW0k9raierNYdzxQi9Q==:117 a=ONQRW0k9raierNYdzxQi9Q==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=sTwFKg_x9MkA:10 a=20KFwNOVAAAA:8 a=7-415B0cAAAA:8 a=2iPkPHWTKe8d4yacwtUA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=biEYGPWJfzWAr4FL6Ov7:22 Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 04:10:07PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 01:50:20PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > From: Dave Chinner > > > > Inode reclaim will still throttle direct reclaim on the per-ag > > reclaim locks. This is no longer necessary as reclaim can run > > non-blocking now. Hence we can remove these locks so that we don't > > arbitrarily block reclaimers just because there are more direct > > reclaimers than there are AGs. > > > > This can result in multiple reclaimers working on the same range of > > an AG, but this doesn't cause any apparent issues. Optimising the > > spread of concurrent reclaimers for best efficiency can be done in a > > future patchset. > > "Future patchset" as in "not in the 9 patches that I have left to read"? Yes. -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com