Linux-Fsdevel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/26] xfs: Improve metadata buffer reclaim accountability
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 07:50:49 +1100
Message-ID: <20191031205049.GS4614@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191031030658.GW15222@magnolia>

On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 08:06:58PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 08:43:35AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 10:25:17AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 02:21:02PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> > > > 
> > > > The buffer cache shrinker frees more than just the xfs_buf slab
> > > > objects - it also frees the pages attached to the buffers. Make sure
> > > > the memory reclaim code accounts for this memory being freed
> > > > correctly, similar to how the inode shrinker accounts for pages
> > > > freed from the page cache due to mapping invalidation.
> > > > 
> > > > We also need to make sure that the mm subsystem knows these are
> > > > reclaimable objects. We provide the memory reclaim subsystem with a
> > > > a shrinker to reclaim xfs_bufs, so we should really mark the slab
> > > > that way.
> > > > 
> > > > We also have a lot of xfs_bufs in a busy system, spread them around
> > > > like we do inodes.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c | 6 +++++-
> > > >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
> > > > index e484f6bead53..45b470f55ad7 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
> > > > @@ -324,6 +324,9 @@ xfs_buf_free(
> > > >  
> > > >  			__free_page(page);
> > > >  		}
> > > > +		if (current->reclaim_state)
> > > > +			current->reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab +=
> > > > +							bp->b_page_count;
> > > 
> > > Hmm, ok, I see how ZONE_RECLAIM and reclaimed_slab fit together.
> > > 
> > > >  	} else if (bp->b_flags & _XBF_KMEM)
> > > >  		kmem_free(bp->b_addr);
> > > >  	_xfs_buf_free_pages(bp);
> > > > @@ -2064,7 +2067,8 @@ int __init
> > > >  xfs_buf_init(void)
> > > >  {
> > > >  	xfs_buf_zone = kmem_zone_init_flags(sizeof(xfs_buf_t), "xfs_buf",
> > > > -						KM_ZONE_HWALIGN, NULL);
> > > > +			KM_ZONE_HWALIGN | KM_ZONE_SPREAD | KM_ZONE_RECLAIM,
> > > 
> > > I guess I'm fine with ZONE_SPREAD too, insofar as it only seems to apply
> > > to a particular "use another node" memory policy when slab is in use.
> > > Was that your intent?
> > 
> > It's more documentation than anything - that we shouldn't be piling
> > these structures all on to one node because that can have severe
> > issues with NUMA memory reclaim algorithms. i.e. the xfs-buf
> > shrinker sets SHRINKER_NUMA_AWARE, so memory pressure on a single
> > node can reclaim all the xfs-bufs on that node without touching any
> > other node.
> > 
> > That means, for example, if we instantiate all the AG header buffers
> > on a single node (e.g. like we do at mount time) then memory
> > pressure on that one node will generate IO stalls across the entire
> > filesystem as other nodes doing work have to repopulate the buffer
> > cache for any allocation for freeing of space/inodes..
> > 
> > IOWs, for large NUMA systems using cpusets this cache should be
> > spread around all of memory, especially as it has NUMA aware
> > reclaim. For everyone else, it's just documentation that improper
> > cgroup or NUMA memory policy could cause you all sorts of problems
> > with this cache.
> > 
> > It's worth noting that SLAB_MEM_SPREAD is used almost exclusively in
> > filesystems for inode caches largely because, at the time (~2006),
> > the only reclaimable cache that could grow to any size large enough
> > to cause problems was the inode cache. It's been cargo-culted ever
> > since, whether it is needed or not (e.g. ceph).
> > 
> > In the case of the xfs_bufs, I've been running workloads recently
> > that cache several million xfs_bufs and only a handful of inodes
> > rather than the other way around. If we spread inodes because
> > caching millions on a single node can cause problems on large NUMA
> > machines, then we also need to spread xfs_bufs...
> 
> Hmm, could we capture this as a comment somewhere?

Sure, but where? We're planning on getting rid of the KM_ZONE flags
in the near future, and most of this is specific to the impacts on
XFS. I could put it in xfs-super.c above where we initialise all the
slabs, I guess. Probably a separate patch, though....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  reply index

Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-09  3:20 [PATCH V2 00/26] mm, xfs: non-blocking inode reclaim Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:20 ` [PATCH 01/26] xfs: Lower CIL flush limit for large logs Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 12:39   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-30 17:08   ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 02/26] xfs: Throttle commits on delayed background CIL push Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 12:38   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 03/26] xfs: don't allow log IO to be throttled Dave Chinner
2019-10-11  9:35   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-11 12:39   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-30 17:14   ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 04/26] xfs: Improve metadata buffer reclaim accountability Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 12:39   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-11 12:57     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-11 23:14       ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 23:13     ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-12 12:05       ` Brian Foster
2019-10-13  3:14         ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-14 13:05           ` Brian Foster
2019-10-30 17:25   ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-30 21:43     ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-31  3:06       ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-31 20:50         ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2019-10-31 21:05           ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-31 21:22             ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-11-03 21:26             ` Dave Chinner
2019-11-04 23:08               ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 05/26] xfs: correctly acount for reclaimable slabs Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 12:39   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-30 17:16   ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 06/26] xfs: synchronous AIL pushing Dave Chinner
2019-10-11  9:42   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-11 12:40   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-11 23:15     ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 07/26] xfs: tail updates only need to occur when LSN changes Dave Chinner
2019-10-11  9:50   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-11 12:40   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 08/26] mm: directed shrinker work deferral Dave Chinner
2019-10-14  8:46   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-14 13:06     ` Brian Foster
2019-10-18  7:59     ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 09/26] shrinkers: use defer_work for GFP_NOFS sensitive shrinkers Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 10/26] mm: factor shrinker work calculations Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 11/26] shrinker: defer work only to kswapd Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 12/26] shrinker: clean up variable types and tracepoints Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 13/26] mm: reclaim_state records pages reclaimed, not slabs Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 14/26] mm: back off direct reclaim on excessive shrinker deferral Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 16:21   ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-10-11 23:20     ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 15/26] mm: kswapd backoff for shrinkers Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 16/26] xfs: synchronous AIL pushing Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 10:18   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-11 15:29     ` Brian Foster
2019-10-11 23:27       ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-12 12:08         ` Brian Foster
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 17/26] xfs: don't block kswapd in inode reclaim Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 15:29   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 18/26] xfs: reduce kswapd blocking on inode locking Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 10:29   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 19/26] xfs: kill background reclaim work Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 10:31   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 20/26] xfs: use AIL pushing for inode reclaim IO Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 17:38   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 21/26] xfs: remove mode from xfs_reclaim_inodes() Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 10:39   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-14 13:07   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 22/26] xfs: track reclaimable inodes using a LRU list Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 10:42   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-14 13:07   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 23/26] xfs: reclaim inodes from the LRU Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 10:56   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-30 23:25     ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 24/26] xfs: remove unusued old inode reclaim code Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 25/26] xfs: rework unreferenced inode lookups Dave Chinner
2019-10-11 12:55   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-11 13:39     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-11 23:38     ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-14 13:07   ` Brian Foster
2019-10-17  1:24     ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-17  7:57       ` Brian Foster
2019-10-18 20:29         ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-09  3:21 ` [PATCH 26/26] xfs: use xfs_ail_push_all_sync in xfs_reclaim_inodes Dave Chinner
2019-10-11  9:55   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-09  7:06 ` [PATCH V2 00/26] mm, xfs: non-blocking inode reclaim Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-11 19:03 ` Josef Bacik
2019-10-11 23:48   ` Dave Chinner
2019-10-12  0:19     ` Josef Bacik
2019-10-12  0:48       ` Dave Chinner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=20191031205049.GS4614@dread.disaster.area \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /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

Linux-Fsdevel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/0 linux-fsdevel/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-fsdevel linux-fsdevel/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel \
		linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-fsdevel

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git