All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: neilb@suse.de, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, dgc@sgi.com,
	tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com, nikita@clusterfs.com,
	trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, yingchao.zhou@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:31:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1177403494.26937.59.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1HgGF4-00008p-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>

On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 10:19 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > This is probably a
> > >  reasonable thing to do but it doesn't feel like the right place.  I
> > >  think get_dirty_limits should return the raw threshold, and
> > >  balance_dirty_pages should do both tests - the bdi-local test and the
> > >  system-wide test.
> > 
> > Ok, that makes sense I guess.
> 
> Well, my narrow minded world view says it's not such a good idea,
> because it would again introduce the deadlock scenario, we're trying
> to avoid.

I was only referring to the placement of the clipping; and exactly where
that happens does not affect the deadlock.

> In a sense allowing a queue to go over the global limit just a little
> bit is a good thing.  Actually the very original code does that: if
> writeback was started for "write_chunk" number of pages, then we allow
> "ratelimit" (8) _new_ pages to be dirtied, effectively ignoring the
> global limit.

It might be time to get rid of that rate-limiting.
balance_dirty_pages()'s fast path is not nearly as heavy as it used to
be. All these fancy counter systems have removed quite a bit of
iteration from there.

> That's why I've been saying, that the current code is so unfair: if
> there are lots of dirty pages to be written back to a particular
> device, then balance_dirty_pages() allows the dirty producer to make
> even more pages dirty, but if there are _no_ dirty pages for a device,
> and we are over the limit, then that dirty producer is allowed
> absolutely no new dirty pages until the global counts subside.

Well, that got fixed on a per device basis with this patch, it is still
true for multiple tasks writing to the same device.

> I'm still not quite sure what purpose the above "soft" limiting
> serves.  It seems to just give advantage to writers, which managed to
> accumulate lots of dirty pages, and then can convert that into even
> more dirtyings.

The queues only limit the actual in-flight writeback pages,
balance_dirty_pages() considers all pages that might become writeback as
well as those that are.

> Would it make sense to remove this behavior, and ensure that
> balance_dirty_pages() doesn't return until the per-queue limits have
> been complied with?

I don't think that will help, balance_dirty_pages drives the queues.
That is, it converts pages from mere dirty to writeback.


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: neilb@suse.de, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, dgc@sgi.com,
	tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com, nikita@clusterfs.com,
	trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, yingchao.zhou@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:31:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1177403494.26937.59.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1HgGF4-00008p-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>

On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 10:19 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > This is probably a
> > >  reasonable thing to do but it doesn't feel like the right place.  I
> > >  think get_dirty_limits should return the raw threshold, and
> > >  balance_dirty_pages should do both tests - the bdi-local test and the
> > >  system-wide test.
> > 
> > Ok, that makes sense I guess.
> 
> Well, my narrow minded world view says it's not such a good idea,
> because it would again introduce the deadlock scenario, we're trying
> to avoid.

I was only referring to the placement of the clipping; and exactly where
that happens does not affect the deadlock.

> In a sense allowing a queue to go over the global limit just a little
> bit is a good thing.  Actually the very original code does that: if
> writeback was started for "write_chunk" number of pages, then we allow
> "ratelimit" (8) _new_ pages to be dirtied, effectively ignoring the
> global limit.

It might be time to get rid of that rate-limiting.
balance_dirty_pages()'s fast path is not nearly as heavy as it used to
be. All these fancy counter systems have removed quite a bit of
iteration from there.

> That's why I've been saying, that the current code is so unfair: if
> there are lots of dirty pages to be written back to a particular
> device, then balance_dirty_pages() allows the dirty producer to make
> even more pages dirty, but if there are _no_ dirty pages for a device,
> and we are over the limit, then that dirty producer is allowed
> absolutely no new dirty pages until the global counts subside.

Well, that got fixed on a per device basis with this patch, it is still
true for multiple tasks writing to the same device.

> I'm still not quite sure what purpose the above "soft" limiting
> serves.  It seems to just give advantage to writers, which managed to
> accumulate lots of dirty pages, and then can convert that into even
> more dirtyings.

The queues only limit the actual in-flight writeback pages,
balance_dirty_pages() considers all pages that might become writeback as
well as those that are.

> Would it make sense to remove this behavior, and ensure that
> balance_dirty_pages() doesn't return until the per-queue limits have
> been complied with?

I don't think that will help, balance_dirty_pages drives the queues.
That is, it converts pages from mere dirty to writeback.

--
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:[~2007-04-24  8:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 110+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-20 15:51 [PATCH 00/10] per device dirty throttling -v5 Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 01/10] revert per-backing_dev-dirty-and-writeback-page-accounting Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 02/10] nfs: remove congestion_end() Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 03/10] lib: dampen the percpu_counter FBC_BATCH Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21  9:55     ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 10:58     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 10:58       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 04/10] lib: percpu_counter_mod64 Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21  9:55     ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 11:02     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 11:02       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 19:21       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 19:21         ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 19:30         ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 19:30           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51 ` [PATCH 05/10] mm: bdi init hooks Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:51   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 06/10] mm: scalable bdi statistics counters Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 07/10] mm: count reclaimable pages per BDI Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21  9:55     ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 11:04     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 11:04       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 08/10] mm: count writeback " Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21  9:55     ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 11:07     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 11:07       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-22  7:19       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-22  7:19         ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-22  9:08         ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-22  9:08           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 09/10] mm: expose BDI statistics in sysfs Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21  9:55     ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 11:08     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 11:08       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52 ` [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-20 15:52   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21  9:55   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21  9:55     ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 10:38     ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-21 10:38       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-21 10:54       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 10:54         ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 20:25         ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-21 20:25           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-23  6:14           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-23  6:14             ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-23  6:29             ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-23  6:29               ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-23  6:39               ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-23  6:39                 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 12:01     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 12:01       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 12:15       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 12:15         ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 19:50         ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-21 19:50           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-23 15:48         ` Christoph Lameter
2007-04-23 15:48           ` Christoph Lameter
2007-04-23 15:58           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-23 15:58             ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-23 16:08             ` Christoph Lameter
2007-04-23 16:08               ` Christoph Lameter
2007-04-22  7:26       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-22  7:26         ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24  2:58   ` Neil Brown
2007-04-24  2:58     ` Neil Brown
2007-04-24  7:09     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24  7:09       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24  8:19       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24  8:19         ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24  8:31         ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2007-04-24  8:31           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24  9:14           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24  9:14             ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24  9:26             ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24  9:26               ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24  9:47               ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24  9:47                 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 10:00                 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 10:00                   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 10:12                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24 10:12                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24 10:19                     ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 10:19                       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 10:24                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24 10:24                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-24 10:40                     ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 10:40                       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 11:22                       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 11:22                         ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 11:50                         ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 11:50                           ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 12:07                           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-24 12:07                             ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-04-22  9:57 ` [PATCH 00/10] per device dirty throttling -v5 Andrew Morton
2007-04-22  9:57   ` Andrew Morton

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=1177403494.26937.59.camel@twins \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dgc@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=nikita@clusterfs.com \
    --cc=tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com \
    --cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
    --cc=yingchao.zhou@gmail.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.