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 11:26:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1177406817.26937.65.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1HgH69-0000Fl-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 11:14 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > 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.
>
> Yes. But current logic says, that if you convert "write_chunk" dirty
> to writeback, you are allowed to dirty "ratelimit" more.
>
> D: number of dirty pages
> W: number of writeback pages
> L: global limit
> C: write_chunk = ratelimit_pages * 1.5
> R: ratelimit
>
> If D+W >= L, then R = 8
>
> Let's assume, that D == L and W == 0. And that all of the dirty pages
> belong to a single device. Also for simplicity, lets assume an
> infinite length queue, and a slow device.
>
> Then while converting the dirty pages to writeback, D / C * R new
> dirty pages can be created. So when all existing dirty have been
> converted:
>
> D = L / C * R
> W = L
>
> D + W = L * (1 + R / C)
>
> So we see, that we're now even more above the limit than before the
> conversion. This means, that we starve writers to other devices,
> which don't have as many dirty pages, because until the slow device
> doesn't finish these writes they will not get to do anything.
>
> Your patch helps this in that if the other writers have an empty queue
> and no dirty, they will be allowed to slowly start writing. But they
> will not gain their full share until the slow dirty-hog goes below the
> global limit, which may take some time.
>
> So I think the logical thing to do, is if the dirty-hog is over it's
> queue limit, don't let it dirty any more until it's dirty+writeback go
> below the limit. That allowes other devices to more quickly gain
> their share of dirty pages.
Ahh, now I see; I had totally blocked out these few lines:
pages_written += write_chunk - wbc.nr_to_write;
if (pages_written >= write_chunk)
break; /* We've done our duty */
yeah, those look dubious indeed... And reading back Neil's comments, I
think he agrees.
Shall we just kill those?
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-24 9:26 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
2007-04-24 9:14 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 9:26 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
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=1177406817.26937.65.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