From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: lwoodman@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vmscan: limit concurrent reclaimers in shrink_zone
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:19:58 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <28c262360912132019u7c0b8efpf89b11a6cbe512b3@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B25BA6E.5010002@redhat.com>
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 12/13/2009 07:14 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Rik van Riel<riel@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>> If too many processes are active doing page reclaim in one zone,
>>> simply go to sleep in shrink_zone().
>
>> I am worried about one.
>>
>> Now, we can put too many processes reclaim_wait with NR_UNINTERRUBTIBLE
>> state.
>> If OOM happens, OOM will kill many innocent processes since
>> uninterruptible task
>> can't handle kill signal until the processes free from reclaim_wait list.
>>
>> I think reclaim_wait list staying time might be long if VM pressure is
>> heavy.
>> Is this a exaggeration?
>>
>> If it is serious problem, how about this?
>>
>> We add new PF_RECLAIM_BLOCK flag and don't pick the process
>> in select_bad_process.
>
> A simpler solution may be to use sleep_on_interruptible, and
> simply have the process continue into shrink_zone() if it
> gets a signal.
I thought it but I was not sure.
Okay. If it is possible, It' more simple.
Could you repost patch with that?
Sorry but I have one requesting.
===
+The default value is 8.
+
+=============================================================
I like this. but why do you select default value as constant 8?
Do you have any reason?
I think it would be better to select the number proportional to NR_CPU.
ex) NR_CPU * 2 or something.
Otherwise looks good to me.
Pessimistically, I assume that the pageout code spends maybe
10% of its time on locking (we have seen far, far worse than
this with thousands of processes in the pageout code). That
means if we have more than 10 threads in the pageout code,
we could end up spending more time on locking and less doing
real work - slowing everybody down.
I rounded it down to the closest power of 2 to come up with
an arbitrary number that looked safe :)
===
We discussed above.
I want to add your desciption into changelog.
That's because after long time, We don't know why we select '8' as
default value.
Your desciption in changelog will explain it to follow-up people. :)
Sorry for bothering you.
> --
> All rights reversed.
>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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:[~2009-12-14 4:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-11 21:46 Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 0:14 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 4:09 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 4:19 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2009-12-14 4:29 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 5:00 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:22 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 12:23 ` [cleanup][PATCH 1/8] vmscan: Make shrink_zone_begin/end helper function KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:34 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 22:39 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:24 ` [PATCH 2/8] Mark sleep_on as deprecated KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 13:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-12-14 16:04 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-12-14 14:34 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 22:44 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:29 ` [PATCH 3/8] Don't use sleep_on() KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:35 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 22:46 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:30 ` [PATCH 4/8] Use prepare_to_wait_exclusive() instead prepare_to_wait() KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:33 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-15 0:45 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15 5:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15 8:28 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15 14:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15 14:58 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-15 18:17 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15 18:43 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15 19:33 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-16 0:48 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-16 2:44 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-16 5:43 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-14 23:03 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:30 ` [PATCH 5/8] Use io_schedule() instead schedule() KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:37 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 23:46 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-15 0:56 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15 1:13 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:31 ` [PATCH 6/8] Stop reclaim quickly when the task reclaimed enough lots pages KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:45 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 23:51 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15 0:11 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-15 0:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 12:32 ` [PATCH 7/8] Use TASK_KILLABLE instead TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:47 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 23:52 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:32 ` [PATCH 8/8] mm: Give up allocation if the task have fatal signal KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:48 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 23:54 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-15 0:50 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15 1:03 ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-15 1:16 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 12:40 ` [PATCH v2] vmscan: limit concurrent reclaimers in shrink_zone KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 17:08 ` Larry Woodman
2009-12-15 0:49 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
[not found] ` <20091217193818.9FA9.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
2009-12-17 12:23 ` FWD: " Larry Woodman
2009-12-17 14:43 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-17 19:55 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-17 21:05 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-12-17 22:52 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-18 16:23 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-12-18 17:43 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-18 10:27 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-18 14:09 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-18 13:38 ` Avi Kivity
2009-12-18 14:12 ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-18 14:13 ` Avi Kivity
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=28c262360912132019u7c0b8efpf89b11a6cbe512b3@mail.gmail.com \
--to=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lwoodman@redhat.com \
--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