From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] xfs: drop ->writepage completely
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 08:08:39 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181112210839.GM19305@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181109151239.GD9153@infradead.org>
On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 07:12:39AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> [adding linux-mm to the CC list]
>
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 05:31:12PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> >
> > ->writepage is only used in one place - single page writeback from
> > memory reclaim. We only allow such writeback from kswapd, not from
> > direct memory reclaim, and so it is rarely used. When it comes from
> > kswapd, it is effectively random dirty page shoot-down, which is
> > horrible for IO patterns. We will already have background writeback
> > trying to clean all the dirty pages in memory as efficiently as
> > possible, so having kswapd interrupt our well formed IO stream only
> > slows things down. So get rid of xfs_vm_writepage() completely.
>
> Interesting. IFF we can pull this off it would simplify a lot of
> things, so I'm generally in favor of it.
Over the past few days of hammeringon this, the only thing I've
noticed is that page reclaim hangs up less, but it's also putting a
bit more pressure on the shrinkers. Filesystem intensive workloads
that drive the machine into reclaim via the page cache seem to hit
breakdown conditions slightly earlier and the impact is that the
shrinkers are run harder. Mostly I see this as the XFS buffer cache
having a much harder time keeping a working set active.
However, while the workloads hit the working set cache, writeback
performance does seem to be slightly higher. It is, however, being
offset by the deeper lows that come from the cache being turned
over.
So there's a bit of rebalancing to be done here as a followup, but
I've been unable to drive the system into unexepected OOM kills or
other bad behaviour as a result of removing ->writepage.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-12 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20181107063127.3902-1-david@fromorbit.com>
[not found] ` <20181107063127.3902-2-david@fromorbit.com>
2018-11-09 15:12 ` [PATCH 01/16] xfs: drop ->writepage completely Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-12 21:08 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2021-02-02 20:51 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=20181112210839.GM19305@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).