linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "NeilBrown" <neilb@suse.de>
To: "Matthew Wilcox" <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Jeff Layton" <jlayton@kernel.org>,
	"Ilya Dryomov" <idryomov@gmail.com>,
	"Miklos Szeredi" <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
	"Trond Myklebust" <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>,
	"Anna Schumaker" <anna.schumaker@netapp.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] nfs: remove reliance on bdi congestion
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 15:55:22 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <164360492268.18996.14760090171177015570@noble.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YfdkCsxyu0jpo+98@casper.infradead.org>

On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 03:03:53PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> >  - .writepage to return AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE if WB_SYNC_NONE
> >     and the flag is set.
> 
> Is this actually useful?  I ask because Dave Chinner believes
> the call to ->writepage in vmscan to be essentially unused.

He would be wrong ...  unless "essentially" means "mostly" rather than
"totally".
swap-out to NFS results in that ->writepage call.

Of course swap_writepage ignores sync_mode, so this might not be
entirely relevant.

But the main point of the patch is not to return AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE
to vmscan.  It is to avoid writing at all when WB_SYNC_NONE and
congested.  e.g. for POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED
It is also to allow the removal of congestion tracking with minimal
changes to behaviour.

If I end up changing some dead code into different dead code, I really
don't care.  I'm not here to clean up all dead code - only the dead code
specifically related to congestion.

NeilBrown


> See commit 21b4ee7029c9, and I had a followup discussion with him
> on IRC:
> 
> <willy> dchinner: did you gather any stats on how often ->writepage was
> 	being called by pageout() before "xfs: drop ->writepage completely"
> 	was added?
> <dchinner> willy: Never saw it on XFS in 3 years in my test environment...
> <dchinner> I don't ever recall seeing the memory reclaim guards we put on
> 	->writepage in XFS ever firing - IIRC they'd been there for the best
> 	part of a decade.
> <willy> not so much the WARN_ON firing but the case where it actually calls
> 	iomap_writepage
> <dchinner> willy: I mean both - I was running with a local patch that warned
> 	on writepage for a long time, regardless of where it was called from.
> 
> I can believe things are different for a network filesystem, or maybe
> XFS does background writeback better than other filesystems, but it
> would be intriguing to be able to get rid of ->writepage altogether
> (or at least from pageout(); migrate.c may be a thornier proposition).
> 
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-31  4:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-31  4:03 [PATCH 0/3] remove dependence of inode_congested() NeilBrown
2022-01-31  4:03 ` [PATCH 1/3] fuse: remove reliance on bdi congestion NeilBrown
2022-01-31  4:28   ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-01-31  4:47     ` NeilBrown
2022-01-31 10:21       ` Miklos Szeredi
2022-01-31 13:12       ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-01-31 23:00         ` NeilBrown
2022-02-01  2:01           ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-02-01  3:28             ` NeilBrown
2022-02-01  4:06               ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-02-07  0:47                 ` NeilBrown
2022-01-31  4:03 ` [PATCH 3/3] ceph: " NeilBrown
2022-01-31  4:03 ` [PATCH 2/3] nfs: " NeilBrown
2022-01-31  4:22   ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-01-31  4:55     ` NeilBrown [this message]
2022-01-31 13:15       ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-01-31 21:38         ` NeilBrown

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=164360492268.18996.14760090171177015570@noble.neil.brown.name \
    --to=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anna.schumaker@netapp.com \
    --cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
    --cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    --cc=trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.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