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: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] fuse writable mmap design
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:42:38 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1195155759.22457.29.camel@lappy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1IskWl-0000oJ-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>


On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 20:37 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > I'm somewhat confused by the complexity. Currently we can already have a
> > lot of dirty pages from FUSE (up to the per BDI dirty limit - so
> > basically up to the total dirty limit).
> > 
> > How is having them dirty from mmap'ed writes different?
> 
> Nope, fuse never had dirty pages.  It does normal writes
> synchronously, just updating the cache.
> 
> The dirty accounting and then the per-bdi throttling basically made it
> possible _at_all_ to have a chance at a writepage implementation which
> is not deadlocky (so thanks for those ;).
> 
> But there's still the throttle_vm_writeout() thing, and the other
> places where the kernel is waiting for a write to complete, which just
> cannot be done within a constrained time if an unprivileged userspace
> process is involved.

Ah, ok, your initial story missed this part (not being intimately
familiar with FUSE made all that somewhat obscure).

The next point then, I'd expect your fuse_page_mkwrite() to push
writeout of your 32-odd mmap pages instead of poll.




WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] fuse writable mmap design
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:42:38 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1195155759.22457.29.camel@lappy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1IskWl-0000oJ-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>

On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 20:37 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > I'm somewhat confused by the complexity. Currently we can already have a
> > lot of dirty pages from FUSE (up to the per BDI dirty limit - so
> > basically up to the total dirty limit).
> > 
> > How is having them dirty from mmap'ed writes different?
> 
> Nope, fuse never had dirty pages.  It does normal writes
> synchronously, just updating the cache.
> 
> The dirty accounting and then the per-bdi throttling basically made it
> possible _at_all_ to have a chance at a writepage implementation which
> is not deadlocky (so thanks for those ;).
> 
> But there's still the throttle_vm_writeout() thing, and the other
> places where the kernel is waiting for a write to complete, which just
> cannot be done within a constrained time if an unprivileged userspace
> process is involved.

Ah, ok, your initial story missed this part (not being intimately
familiar with FUSE made all that somewhat obscure).

The next point then, I'd expect your fuse_page_mkwrite() to push
writeout of your 32-odd mmap pages instead of poll.



--
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:[~2007-11-15 19:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-15 16:10 [RFC] fuse writable mmap design Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 16:10 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 19:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 19:22   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 19:37   ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 19:37     ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 19:42     ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2007-11-15 19:42       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 19:57       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 19:57         ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 20:01         ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 20:01           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 20:11           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 20:11             ` Miklos Szeredi

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=1195155759.22457.29.camel@lappy \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    /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.