From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: mgorman@techsingularity.net, vbabka@suse.cz, linux-mm@kvack.org,
hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com, brouer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: mm: Why WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue remains pending?
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 08:19:44 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170711121944.GA2969123@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201707111951.IHA98084.OHQtVOFJMLOSFF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Hello,
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 07:51:07PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> I tried below change. It indeed reduced delays, but even with WQ_HIGHPRI, up to a
> few seconds of delay is unavoidable? I wished it is processed within a few jiffies.
The rescuer doesn't take long to kick in but there's only one in the
entire system. If you have 64 cpus, that one rescuer is gonna be
visiting each CPU servicing them one-by-one and the scheduling
latencies and execution times accumulate. Again, this is a deadlock
prevention mechanism. If these per-cpu tasks need to be executed on
every CPU without latency regardless of memory pressure, it has to
pre-allocate all the resources up-front - ie. use kthread_workers
instead of workqueue.
> By the way, I think it might be useful if delay of each work item is
> printed together...
Yeah, sure, please feel free to submit a patch.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-11 12:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-29 10:57 Tetsuo Handa
2017-07-07 10:27 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-07-10 18:12 ` Tejun Heo
2017-07-11 10:51 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-07-11 12:19 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
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=20170711121944.GA2969123@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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