linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: neilb@suse.de, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, dgc@sgi.com,
	tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com, nikita@clusterfs.com,
	trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, yingchao.zhou@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:31:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1177403494.26937.59.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1HgGF4-00008p-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>

On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 10:19 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > This is probably a
> > >  reasonable thing to do but it doesn't feel like the right place.  I
> > >  think get_dirty_limits should return the raw threshold, and
> > >  balance_dirty_pages should do both tests - the bdi-local test and the
> > >  system-wide test.
> > 
> > Ok, that makes sense I guess.
> 
> Well, my narrow minded world view says it's not such a good idea,
> because it would again introduce the deadlock scenario, we're trying
> to avoid.

I was only referring to the placement of the clipping; and exactly where
that happens does not affect the deadlock.

> In a sense allowing a queue to go over the global limit just a little
> bit is a good thing.  Actually the very original code does that: if
> writeback was started for "write_chunk" number of pages, then we allow
> "ratelimit" (8) _new_ pages to be dirtied, effectively ignoring the
> global limit.

It might be time to get rid of that rate-limiting.
balance_dirty_pages()'s fast path is not nearly as heavy as it used to
be. All these fancy counter systems have removed quite a bit of
iteration from there.

> That's why I've been saying, that the current code is so unfair: if
> there are lots of dirty pages to be written back to a particular
> device, then balance_dirty_pages() allows the dirty producer to make
> even more pages dirty, but if there are _no_ dirty pages for a device,
> and we are over the limit, then that dirty producer is allowed
> absolutely no new dirty pages until the global counts subside.

Well, that got fixed on a per device basis with this patch, it is still
true for multiple tasks writing to the same device.

> I'm still not quite sure what purpose the above "soft" limiting
> serves.  It seems to just give advantage to writers, which managed to
> accumulate lots of dirty pages, and then can convert that into even
> more dirtyings.

The queues only limit the actual in-flight writeback pages,
balance_dirty_pages() considers all pages that might become writeback as
well as those that are.

> Would it make sense to remove this behavior, and ensure that
> balance_dirty_pages() doesn't return until the per-queue limits have
> been complied with?

I don't think that will help, balance_dirty_pages drives the queues.
That is, it converts pages from mere dirty to writeback.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2007-04-24  8:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-20 15:51 [PATCH 00/10] per device dirty throttling -v5 Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 01/10] revert per-backing_dev-dirty-and-writeback-page-accounting Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 02/10] nfs: remove congestion_end() Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 03/10] lib: dampen the percpu_counter FBC_BATCH Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 10:58     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 04/10] lib: percpu_counter_mod64 Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 11:02     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 19:21       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 19:30         ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 05/10] mm: bdi init hooks Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 06/10] mm: scalable bdi statistics counters Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 07/10] mm: count reclaimable pages per BDI Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 11:04     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 08/10] mm: count writeback " Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 11:07     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-22  7:19       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-22  9:08         ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 09/10] mm: expose BDI statistics in sysfs Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 11:08     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 10:38     ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-21 10:54       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 20:25         ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-23  6:14           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-23  6:29             ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-23  6:39               ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 12:01     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 12:15       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 19:50         ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-23 15:48         ` Christoph Lameter
2007-04-23 15:58           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-23 16:08             ` Christoph Lameter
2007-04-22  7:26       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24  2:58   ` Neil Brown
2007-04-24  7:09     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24  8:19       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24  8:31         ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2007-04-24  9:14           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24  9:26             ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24  9:47               ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 10:00                 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 10:12                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24 10:19                     ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 10:24                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24 10:40                     ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 11:22                       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 11:50                         ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 12:07                           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-22  9:57 ` [PATCH 00/10] per device dirty throttling -v5 Andrew Morton

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=1177403494.26937.59.camel@twins \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dgc@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=nikita@clusterfs.com \
    --cc=tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com \
    --cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
    --cc=yingchao.zhou@gmail.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