From: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Jan Blunck <jblunck@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@osdl.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, balbir@in.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [patch 0/5] [PATCH,RFC] vfs: per-superblock unused dentries list (2nd version)
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:00:13 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060619010013.GC2114946@melbourne.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17557.61307.364404.640539@cse.unsw.edu.au>
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 10:27:39AM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Monday June 19, dgc@sgi.com wrote:
> >
> > > I can see that shrink_dcache_sb could take a long time and should be
> > > fixed, which should be as simple as replacing it with
> > > shrink_dcache_parent; shrink_dcache_anon.
> >
> > But these are not guaranteed to reclaim all the dentries from a given
> > superblock. Yes, they move the dentries to the LRU, but other activity in the
> > system means that they may not get reclaimed during the subsequent calls
> > to prune_dcache() and hence they may live beyond the unmount....
> >
>
> My proposed patch earlier in this thread (I can post it again if you
> like) addresses exactly this issue. Instead of moving dentries to the
> global LRU, it moves them to a private LRU, and the calls prune_dcache
> on that. So there is no room for other activity to get in the way of
> prune_dcache doing what needs to be done.
Ok. That sounds like it would work.
> > > But I'm still puzzled as to why a long dcache LRU slows down
> > > unmounting.
> > >
> > > Can you give more details?
> >
> > It's not the unmount that slows down - it's the fact that the dcache lock
> > is held for so long that rest of the system halts for time it takes
> > to run shrink_dcache_sb(). We've seen up to 50s to do a (touch fred; rm fred)
> > when the LRU has grown to several million dentries and shrink_dcache_sb()
> > is running. When this happens, it's not uncommon to see every CPU in the
> > machine spinning on the dcache_lock...
>
> Definitely a problem.
> Maybe it was hoped that the call to cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock)
> would avoid this, but apparently not.
The first pass over the LRU doesn't even do that....
> I still maintain that we should replace shrink_dcache_sb with calls to
> shrink_dcache_anon and shrink_dcache_parent. That, together with my
> previous patch, should fix this problem quite cleanly. If I send you
> a combined patch against the latest -mm can you test?
Ok. Send me the patch and I'll try to get some tests done on it...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-06-19 1:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-01 9:51 [patch 0/5] [PATCH,RFC] vfs: per-superblock unused dentries list (2nd version) jblunck
2006-06-01 9:51 ` [patch 1/5] vfs: remove whitespace noise from fs/dcache.c jblunck
2006-06-01 9:51 ` [patch 2/5] vfs: d_genocide() doesnt add dentries to unused list jblunck
2006-06-01 9:51 ` [patch 3/5] vfs: remove shrink_dcache_anon() jblunck
2006-06-01 9:51 ` [patch 4/5] vfs: per superblock dentry stats jblunck
2006-06-01 9:51 ` [patch 5/5] vfs: per superblock dentry unused list jblunck
2006-06-02 1:06 ` [patch 0/5] [PATCH,RFC] vfs: per-superblock unused dentries list (2nd version) Andrew Morton
2006-06-02 2:23 ` David Chinner
2006-06-02 2:49 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-02 4:17 ` David Chinner
2006-06-02 15:33 ` Jan Blunck
2006-06-05 1:30 ` Neil Brown
2006-06-16 15:51 ` Jan Blunck
2006-06-16 22:25 ` Neil Brown
2006-06-18 23:56 ` David Chinner
2006-06-19 0:27 ` Neil Brown
2006-06-19 1:00 ` David Chinner [this message]
2006-06-19 1:21 ` Neil Brown
2006-06-19 2:04 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-19 2:25 ` Neil Brown
2006-06-19 5:55 ` David Chinner
2006-06-19 6:33 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-19 8:30 ` David Chinner
2006-06-19 10:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-06-19 11:01 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-19 17:34 ` Ravinandan Arakali
2006-06-20 0:37 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-20 21:34 ` Ravinandan Arakali
2006-06-20 22:10 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-20 23:56 ` Ravinandan Arakali
2006-06-21 0:18 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-21 0:31 ` Ravinandan Arakali
2006-06-19 9:34 ` Jan Blunck
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=20060619010013.GC2114946@melbourne.sgi.com \
--to=dgc@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=balbir@in.ibm.com \
--cc=jblunck@suse.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.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 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.