linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:04:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100721130435.GH16031@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100721115250.GX13117@csn.ul.ie>

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:52:50PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:02:18AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > What
> > I had in mind is the attached patch.  It is not tested and hacked up
> > rather quickly due to time constraints, sorry, but you should get the
> > idea.  I hope I did not miss anything fundamental.
> > 
> > Note that since only kswapd enters pageout() anymore, everything
> > depending on PAGEOUT_IO_SYNC in there is moot, since there are no sync
> > cycles for kswapd.  Just to mitigate the WTF-count on the patch :-)
> > 
> 
> Anon page writeback can enter pageout. See
> 
> static inline bool reclaim_can_writeback(struct scan_control *sc,
>                                         struct page *page)
> {
>         return !page_is_file_cache(page) || current_is_kswapd();
> }
> 
> So the logic still applies.

Yeah, I noticed it only after looking at it again this morning.  My
bad, it got a bit late when I wrote it.

> > @@ -643,12 +639,14 @@ static noinline_for_stack void free_page
> >   * shrink_page_list() returns the number of reclaimed pages
> >   */
> >  static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
> > -					struct scan_control *sc,
> > -					enum pageout_io sync_writeback)
> > +				      struct scan_control *sc,
> > +				      enum pageout_io sync_writeback,
> > +				      int *dirty_seen)
> >  {
> >  	LIST_HEAD(ret_pages);
> >  	LIST_HEAD(free_pages);
> >  	int pgactivate = 0;
> > +	unsigned long nr_dirty = 0;
> >  	unsigned long nr_reclaimed = 0;
> >  
> >  	cond_resched();
> > @@ -657,7 +655,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(st
> >  		enum page_references references;
> >  		struct address_space *mapping;
> >  		struct page *page;
> > -		int may_enter_fs;
> > +		int may_pageout;
> >  
> >  		cond_resched();
> >  
> > @@ -681,10 +679,15 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(st
> >  		if (page_mapped(page) || PageSwapCache(page))
> >  			sc->nr_scanned++;
> >  
> > -		may_enter_fs = (sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) ||
> > +		/*
> > +		 * To prevent stack overflows, only kswapd can enter
> > +		 * the filesystem.  Swap IO is always fine (for now).
> > +		 */
> > +		may_pageout = current_is_kswapd() ||
> >  			(PageSwapCache(page) && (sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_IO));
> >  
> 
> We lost the __GFP_FS check and it's vaguely possible kswapd could call the
> allocator with GFP_NOFS. While you check it before wait_on_page_writeback it
> needs to be checked before calling pageout(). I toyed around with
> creating a may_pageout that took everything into account but I couldn't
> convince myself there was no holes or serious change in functionality.

Yeah, I checked balance_pgdat(), saw GFP_KERNEL and went for it.  But
it's probably better to keep such dependencies out.

> Ok, is this closer to what you had in mind?

IMHO this is (almost) ready to get merged, so I am including the
nitpicking comments :-)

> ==== CUT HERE ====
> [PATCH] vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim
> 
> When memory is under enough pressure, a process may enter direct
> reclaim to free pages in the same manner kswapd does. If a dirty page is
> encountered during the scan, this page is written to backing storage using
> mapping->writepage. This can result in very deep call stacks, particularly
> if the target storage or filesystem are complex. It has already been observed
> on XFS that the stack overflows but the problem is not XFS-specific.
> 
> This patch prevents direct reclaim writing back filesystem pages by checking
> if current is kswapd or the page is anonymous before writing back.  If the
> dirty pages cannot be written back, they are placed back on the LRU lists
> for either background writing by the BDI threads or kswapd. If in direct
> lumpy reclaim and dirty pages are encountered, the process will stall for
> the background flusher before trying to reclaim the pages again.
> 
> As the call-chain for writing anonymous pages is not expected to be deep
> and they are not cleaned by flusher threads, anonymous pages are still
> written back in direct reclaim.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> 
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 6587155..e3a5816 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c

[...]

Does factoring pageout() still make sense in this patch?  It does not
introduce a second callsite.

> @@ -639,18 +645,25 @@ static noinline_for_stack void free_page_list(struct list_head *free_pages)
>  	pagevec_free(&freed_pvec);
>  }
>  
> +/* Direct lumpy reclaim waits up to 5 seconds for background cleaning */
> +#define MAX_SWAP_CLEAN_WAIT 50

That's placed a bit randomly now that shrink_page_list() doesn't use
it anymore.  I moved it just above shrink_inactive_list() but maybe it
would be better at the file's head?

>  /*
>   * shrink_page_list() returns the number of reclaimed pages
>   */
>  static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
>  					struct scan_control *sc,
> -					enum pageout_io sync_writeback)
> +					enum pageout_io sync_writeback,
> +					unsigned long *nr_still_dirty)
>  {
> -	LIST_HEAD(ret_pages);
>  	LIST_HEAD(free_pages);
> -	int pgactivate = 0;
> +	LIST_HEAD(putback_pages);
> +	LIST_HEAD(dirty_pages);
> +	int pgactivate;
> +	unsigned long nr_dirty = 0;
>  	unsigned long nr_reclaimed = 0;
>  
> +	pgactivate = 0;

Spurious change?

>  	cond_resched();
>  
>  	while (!list_empty(page_list)) {
> @@ -741,7 +754,18 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
>  			}
>  		}
>  
> -		if (PageDirty(page)) {
> +		if (PageDirty(page))  {

Ha!

> +			/*
> +			 * Only kswapd can writeback filesystem pages to
> +			 * avoid risk of stack overflow
> +			 */
> +			if (page_is_file_cache(page) && !current_is_kswapd()) {
> +				list_add(&page->lru, &dirty_pages);
> +				unlock_page(page);
> +				nr_dirty++;
> +				goto keep_dirty;
> +			}

I don't understand why you keep the extra dirty list.  Couldn't this
just be `goto keep_locked'?

>  			if (references == PAGEREF_RECLAIM_CLEAN)
>  				goto keep_locked;
>  			if (!may_enter_fs)
> @@ -852,13 +876,19 @@ activate_locked:
>  keep_locked:
>  		unlock_page(page);
>  keep:
> -		list_add(&page->lru, &ret_pages);
> +		list_add(&page->lru, &putback_pages);
> +keep_dirty:
>  		VM_BUG_ON(PageLRU(page) || PageUnevictable(page));
>  	}
>  
>  	free_page_list(&free_pages);
>  
> -	list_splice(&ret_pages, page_list);
> +	if (nr_dirty) {
> +		*nr_still_dirty = nr_dirty;

You either have to set *nr_still_dirty unconditionally or
(re)initialize the variable in shrink_inactive_list().

> +		list_splice(&dirty_pages, page_list);
> +	}
> +	list_splice(&putback_pages, page_list);

When we retry those pages, the dirty ones come last on the list.  Was
this maybe the intention behind collecting dirties separately?

> @@ -1245,6 +1275,7 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct zone *zone,
>  	unsigned long nr_active;
>  	unsigned long nr_anon;
>  	unsigned long nr_file;
> +	unsigned long nr_dirty;
>  
>  	while (unlikely(too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc))) {
>  		congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
> @@ -1293,26 +1324,34 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct zone *zone,
>  
>  	spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
>  
> -	nr_reclaimed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, sc, PAGEOUT_IO_ASYNC);
> +	nr_reclaimed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, sc, PAGEOUT_IO_ASYNC,
> +								&nr_dirty);
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * If we are direct reclaiming for contiguous pages and we do
> +	 * If specific pages are needed such as with direct reclaiming
> +	 * for contiguous pages or for memory containers and we do
>  	 * not reclaim everything in the list, try again and wait
> -	 * for IO to complete. This will stall high-order allocations
> -	 * but that should be acceptable to the caller
> +	 * for IO to complete. This will stall callers that require
> +	 * specific pages but it should be acceptable to the caller
>  	 */
> -	if (nr_reclaimed < nr_taken && !current_is_kswapd() &&
> -			sc->lumpy_reclaim_mode) {
> -		congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
> +	if (sc->may_writepage && !current_is_kswapd() &&
> +			(sc->lumpy_reclaim_mode || sc->mem_cgroup)) {
> +		int dirty_retry = MAX_SWAP_CLEAN_WAIT;
>  
> -		/*
> -		 * The attempt at page out may have made some
> -		 * of the pages active, mark them inactive again.
> -		 */
> -		nr_active = clear_active_flags(&page_list, NULL);
> -		count_vm_events(PGDEACTIVATE, nr_active);
> +		while (nr_reclaimed < nr_taken && nr_dirty && dirty_retry--) {
> +			wakeup_flusher_threads(laptop_mode ? 0 : nr_dirty);

Yup, minding laptop_mode (together with may_writepage).  Agreed.

> +			congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
>  
> -		nr_reclaimed += shrink_page_list(&page_list, sc, PAGEOUT_IO_SYNC);
> +			/*
> +			 * The attempt at page out may have made some
> +			 * of the pages active, mark them inactive again.
> +			 */
> +			nr_active = clear_active_flags(&page_list, NULL);
> +			count_vm_events(PGDEACTIVATE, nr_active);
> +	
> +			nr_reclaimed += shrink_page_list(&page_list, sc,
> +						PAGEOUT_IO_SYNC, &nr_dirty);
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	local_irq_disable();

Thanks,
	Hannes

--
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>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-07-21 13:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-19 13:11 [PATCH 0/8] Reduce writeback from page reclaim context V4 Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 13:11 ` [PATCH 1/8] vmscan: tracing: Roll up of patches currently in mmotm Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 13:11 ` [PATCH 2/8] vmscan: tracing: Update trace event to track if page reclaim IO is for anon or file pages Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 13:24   ` Rik van Riel
2010-07-19 14:15   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-19 14:24     ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 14:26       ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-19 13:11 ` [PATCH 3/8] vmscan: tracing: Update post-processing script to distinguish between anon and file IO from page reclaim Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 13:32   ` Rik van Riel
2010-07-19 13:11 ` [PATCH 4/8] vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 14:19   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-19 14:26     ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 18:25   ` Rik van Riel
2010-07-19 22:14   ` Johannes Weiner
2010-07-20 13:45     ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-20 22:02       ` Johannes Weiner
2010-07-21 11:36         ` Johannes Weiner
2010-07-21 11:52         ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-21 12:01           ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-21 14:27             ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-21 23:57               ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-22  9:19                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-22  9:22                   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-21 13:04           ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2010-07-21 13:38             ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-21 14:28               ` Johannes Weiner
2010-07-21 14:31                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-21 14:39                   ` Johannes Weiner
2010-07-21 15:06                     ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-26  8:29               ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-26  9:12                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-26 11:19                   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-26 12:53                     ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-26 13:03                       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-19 13:11 ` [PATCH 5/8] fs,btrfs: Allow kswapd to writeback pages Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 18:27   ` Rik van Riel
2010-07-19 13:11 ` [PATCH 6/8] fs,xfs: " Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 14:20   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-19 14:43     ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 13:11 ` [PATCH 7/8] writeback: sync old inodes first in background writeback Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 14:21   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-19 14:40     ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 14:48       ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-22  8:52       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-22  9:02         ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-22  9:21         ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-22 10:48           ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-23  9:45             ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-23 10:57               ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-23 11:49                 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-23 12:20                   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-25 10:43                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-25 12:03                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-07-26  3:27                     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-26  4:11                       ` Minchan Kim
2010-07-26  4:37                         ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-26 16:30                           ` Minchan Kim
2010-07-26 22:48                             ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-26  3:08                   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-26  3:11                     ` Rik van Riel
2010-07-26  3:17                       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-22 15:34           ` Minchan Kim
2010-07-23 11:59             ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-22  9:42         ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-23  8:33           ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-22  1:13     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-19 18:43   ` Rik van Riel
2010-07-19 13:11 ` [PATCH 8/8] vmscan: Kick flusher threads to clean pages when reclaim is encountering dirty pages Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 14:23   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-19 14:37     ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-19 22:48       ` Johannes Weiner
2010-07-20 14:10         ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-20 22:05           ` Johannes Weiner
2010-07-19 18:59   ` Rik van Riel
2010-07-19 22:26   ` Johannes Weiner
2010-07-26  7:28   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-26  9:26     ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-26 11:27       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-26 12:57         ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-26 13:10           ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-27 13:35             ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-27 14:24               ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-27 14:34                 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-27 14:40                   ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-27 14:55                     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-27 14:38                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-07-27 15:21                   ` Wu Fengguang

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=20100721130435.GH16031@cmpxchg.org \
    --to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=riel@redhat.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