linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Richard Kennedy <richard@rsk.demon.co.uk>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] writeback: reduce calls to global_page_state in balance_dirty_pages()
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:12:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100727091220.GD3358@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100727035941.GA15007@localhost>

On Tue 27-07-10 11:59:41, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > This patch slightly changes behavior by replacing clip_bdi_dirty_limit()
> > > with the explicit check (nr_reclaimable + nr_writeback >= dirty_thresh)
> > > to avoid exceeding the dirty limit. Since the bdi dirty limit is mostly
> > > accurate we don't need to do routinely clip. A simple dirty limit check
> > > would be enough.
> > > 
> > > The check is necessary because, in principle we should throttle
> > > everything calling balance_dirty_pages() when we're over the total
> > > limit, as said by Peter.
> > > 
> > > We now set and clear dirty_exceeded not only based on bdi dirty limits,
> > > but also on the global dirty limits. This is a bit counterintuitive, but
> > > the global limits are the ultimate goal and shall be always imposed.
> >   Thinking about this again - what you did is rather big change for systems
> > with more active BDIs. For example if I have two disks sda and sdb and
> > write for some time to sda, then dirty limit for sdb gets scaled down.
> > So when we start writing to sbd we'll heavily throttle the threads until
> > the dirty limit for sdb ramps up regardless of how far are we to reach the
> > global limit...
> 
> The global threshold check is added in place of clip_bdi_dirty_limit()
> for safety and not intended as a behavior change. If ever leading to
> big behavior change and regression, that it would be indicating some
> too permissive per-bdi threshold calculation.
> 
> Did you see the global dirty threshold get exceeded when writing to 2+
> devices? Occasional small exceeding should be OK though. I tried the
> following debug patch and see no warnings when doing two concurrent cp
> over local disk and NFS.
  Oops, sorry. I've misread the code. You're right. There shouldn't be a big
change in the behavior.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

--
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:[~2010-07-27  9:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-11  2:06 [PATCH 0/6] writeback cleanups and trivial fixes Wu Fengguang
2010-07-11  2:06 ` [PATCH 1/6] writeback: take account of NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP in balance_dirty_pages() Wu Fengguang
2010-07-12 21:52   ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-13  8:58     ` Miklos Szeredi
2010-07-15 14:50       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-11  2:06 ` [PATCH 2/6] writeback: reduce calls to global_page_state " Wu Fengguang
2010-07-26 15:19   ` Jan Kara
2010-07-27  3:59     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-27  9:12       ` Jan Kara [this message]
2010-07-28  2:04         ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-03 14:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-11  2:06 ` [PATCH 3/6] writeback: avoid unnecessary calculation of bdi dirty thresholds Wu Fengguang
2010-07-12 21:56   ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-15 14:55     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-19 21:35   ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-20  3:34     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-20  4:14       ` Andrew Morton
2010-08-03 15:03   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-03 15:10     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-04 16:41     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-04 17:10       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-11  2:07 ` [PATCH 4/6] writeback: dont redirty tail an inode with dirty pages Wu Fengguang
2010-07-12  2:01   ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-12 15:31     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-12 22:13       ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-15 15:35         ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-11  2:07 ` [PATCH 5/6] writeback: fix queue_io() ordering Wu Fengguang
2010-07-12 22:15   ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-11  2:07 ` [PATCH 6/6] writeback: merge for_kupdate and !for_kupdate cases Wu Fengguang
2010-07-12  2:08   ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-12 15:52     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-12 22:06       ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-12 22:22       ` Andrew Morton
2010-08-05 16:01         ` Wu Fengguang
2010-07-11  2:44 ` [PATCH 0/6] writeback cleanups and trivial fixes Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-11  2:50   ` 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=20100727091220.GD3358@quack.suse.cz \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=richard@rsk.demon.co.uk \
    /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