From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com>,
"Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com" <Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] MM: replace PF_LESS_THROTTLE with PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2020 17:15:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200403151534.GG22681@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87sghmyd8v.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
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.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-03 15:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-26 3:25 [PATCH/RFC] MM: fix writeback for NFS NeilBrown
2020-04-01 23:52 ` Writeback fixes " NeilBrown
2020-04-01 23:53 ` [PATCH 1/2] MM: replace PF_LESS_THROTTLE with PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE NeilBrown
2020-04-01 23:54 ` [PATCH 2/2] Deprecate NR_UNSTABLE_NFS, use NR_WRITEBACK NeilBrown
2020-04-02 15:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-04-02 22:35 ` [PATCH 2/2 - v2] MM: Discard NR_UNSTABLE_NFS, use NR_WRITEBACK instead NeilBrown
2020-04-03 9:42 ` Jan Kara
2020-04-03 11:03 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-06 0:14 ` NeilBrown
2020-04-06 7:41 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-06 23:28 ` NeilBrown
2020-04-07 7:33 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-02 19:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] Deprecate NR_UNSTABLE_NFS, use NR_WRITEBACK Jan Kara
2020-04-02 16:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] MM: replace PF_LESS_THROTTLE with PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE Jan Kara
2020-04-03 15:15 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2020-04-03 21:40 ` NeilBrown
2020-04-06 7:44 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-06 9:36 ` Jan Kara
2020-04-06 10:57 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-06 11:58 ` NeilBrown
2020-04-02 4:26 ` Hillf Danton
2020-04-02 4:57 ` NeilBrown
2020-04-06 3:58 ` Hillf Danton
2020-04-06 23:42 ` Writeback fixes for NFS - V2 NeilBrown
2020-04-06 23:43 ` [PATCH 1/2] MM: replace PF_LESS_THROTTLE with PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE NeilBrown
2020-04-07 16:10 ` Chuck Lever
2020-04-16 0:29 ` Writeback fixes for NFS - V3 NeilBrown
2020-04-16 0:30 ` [PATCH 1/2 V3] MM: replace PF_LESS_THROTTLE with PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE NeilBrown
2020-04-16 6:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-04-16 15:19 ` Jan Kara
2020-04-21 2:22 ` NeilBrown
2020-04-22 12:46 ` Jan Kara
2020-05-13 7:16 ` NeilBrown
2020-05-13 7:17 ` [PATCH 1/2 V4] " NeilBrown
2020-05-15 11:10 ` Jan Kara
2020-06-01 0:46 ` Writeback fixes for NFS NeilBrown
2020-06-01 0:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] MM: replace PF_LESS_THROTTLE with PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE NeilBrown
2020-06-01 0:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] MM: Discard NR_UNSTABLE_NFS, use NR_WRITEBACK instead NeilBrown
2020-05-13 7:18 ` [PATCH 2/2 V4] " NeilBrown
2020-05-15 9:59 ` Jan Kara
2020-04-16 0:31 ` [PATCH 2/2 V3] " NeilBrown
2020-04-16 6:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-04-16 15:24 ` Jan Kara
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=20200403151534.GG22681@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=trondmy@hammerspace.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 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).