From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] vmscan: Do not writeback pages in direct reclaim
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:54:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100611125455.GC8798@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100610231706.1d7528f2.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:17:06PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 10:02:25 +0100 Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote:
>
> > When memory is under enough pressure, a process may enter direct
> > reclaim to free pages in the same manner kswapd does. If a dirty page is
> > encountered during the scan, this page is written to backing storage using
> > mapping->writepage. This can result in very deep call stacks, particularly
> > if the target storage or filesystem are complex. It has already been observed
> > on XFS that the stack overflows but the problem is not XFS-specific.
> >
> > This patch prevents direct reclaim writing back pages by not setting
> > may_writepage in scan_control. Instead, dirty pages are placed back on the
> > LRU lists for either background writing by the BDI threads or kswapd. If
> > in direct lumpy reclaim and dirty pages are encountered, the process will
> > kick the background flushter threads before trying again.
> >
>
> This wouldn't have worked at all well back in the days when you could
> dirty all memory with MAP_SHARED.
Yes, it would have been a bucket of fail.
> The balance_dirty_pages() calls on
> the fault path will now save us but if for some reason we were ever to
> revert those, we'd need to revert this change too, I suspect.
>
Quite likely.
> As it stands, it would be wildly incautious to make a change like
> this without first working out why we're pulling so many dirty pages
> off the LRU tail, and fixing that.
>
Ok, I have a series prepared for testing that is in three parts.
Patches 1-4: tracepoints to gather how many dirty pages there really are
being written out on the LRU
Patches 5-10: reduce the stack usage in page reclaim
Patches 9-10: Avoid writing out pages from direct reclaim and instead
kicking background flushers to do the writing
Patches 1-4 on its own should an accurate view of how many dirty pages are
really being written back and if it's a real problem or not.
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] vmscan: Do not writeback pages in direct reclaim
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:54:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100611125455.GC8798@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100610231706.1d7528f2.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:17:06PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 10:02:25 +0100 Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote:
>
> > When memory is under enough pressure, a process may enter direct
> > reclaim to free pages in the same manner kswapd does. If a dirty page is
> > encountered during the scan, this page is written to backing storage using
> > mapping->writepage. This can result in very deep call stacks, particularly
> > if the target storage or filesystem are complex. It has already been observed
> > on XFS that the stack overflows but the problem is not XFS-specific.
> >
> > This patch prevents direct reclaim writing back pages by not setting
> > may_writepage in scan_control. Instead, dirty pages are placed back on the
> > LRU lists for either background writing by the BDI threads or kswapd. If
> > in direct lumpy reclaim and dirty pages are encountered, the process will
> > kick the background flushter threads before trying again.
> >
>
> This wouldn't have worked at all well back in the days when you could
> dirty all memory with MAP_SHARED.
Yes, it would have been a bucket of fail.
> The balance_dirty_pages() calls on
> the fault path will now save us but if for some reason we were ever to
> revert those, we'd need to revert this change too, I suspect.
>
Quite likely.
> As it stands, it would be wildly incautious to make a change like
> this without first working out why we're pulling so many dirty pages
> off the LRU tail, and fixing that.
>
Ok, I have a series prepared for testing that is in three parts.
Patches 1-4: tracepoints to gather how many dirty pages there really are
being written out on the LRU
Patches 5-10: reduce the stack usage in page reclaim
Patches 9-10: Avoid writing out pages from direct reclaim and instead
kicking background flushers to do the writing
Patches 1-4 on its own should an accurate view of how many dirty pages are
really being written back and if it's a real problem or not.
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
--
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:[~2010-06-11 12:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 134+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-08 9:02 [RFC PATCH 0/6] Do not call ->writepage[s] from direct reclaim and use a_ops->writepages() where possible Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` [PATCH 1/6] tracing, vmscan: Add trace events for kswapd wakeup, sleeping and direct reclaim Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` [PATCH 2/6] tracing, vmscan: Add trace events for LRU page isolation Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` [PATCH 3/6] tracing, vmscan: Add trace event when a page is written Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` [PATCH 4/6] tracing, vmscan: Add a postprocessing script for reclaim-related ftrace events Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` [PATCH 5/6] vmscan: Write out ranges of pages contiguous to the inode where possible Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 6:10 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 6:10 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 12:49 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 12:49 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 19:07 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 19:07 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 20:44 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 20:44 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 21:33 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 21:33 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-12 0:17 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-12 0:17 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 16:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-11 16:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-08 9:02 ` [PATCH 6/6] vmscan: Do not writeback pages in direct reclaim Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:02 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 6:17 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 6:17 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 12:54 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2010-06-11 12:54 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 16:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-11 16:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-11 17:43 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 17:43 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 17:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-11 17:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-11 18:13 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 18:13 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:08 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] Do not call ->writepage[s] from direct reclaim and use a_ops->writepages() where possible Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-08 9:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-08 9:28 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-08 9:28 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 16:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-11 16:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-11 18:15 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 18:15 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 19:12 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-11 19:12 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-09 2:52 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-09 2:52 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-09 9:52 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-09 9:52 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-10 0:38 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-10 0:38 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-10 1:10 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-10 1:10 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-10 1:29 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-10 1:29 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-11 5:57 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 5:57 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-11 12:33 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 12:33 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 16:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-11 16:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-11 18:17 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-11 18:17 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 14:00 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 14:00 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 14:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 14:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 14:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 14:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 14:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 14:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 15:08 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 15:08 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 15:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 15:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 15:45 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 15:45 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 16:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 16:31 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:31 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:49 ` Rik van Riel
2010-06-15 16:49 ` Rik van Riel
2010-06-15 16:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 16:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 19:13 ` Rik van Riel
2010-06-15 19:13 ` Rik van Riel
2010-06-15 19:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 19:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 19:44 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-15 19:44 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-16 7:57 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-16 7:57 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-16 16:59 ` Rik van Riel
2010-06-16 16:59 ` Rik van Riel
2010-06-16 17:04 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-16 17:04 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:54 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-15 16:54 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-15 15:38 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 15:38 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 16:14 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:14 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 16:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 16:30 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 16:30 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 16:34 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 16:34 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 16:54 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:54 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 16:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 16:37 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:37 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 16:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 16:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-15 14:51 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 14:51 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 14:55 ` Rik van Riel
2010-06-15 14:55 ` Rik van Riel
2010-06-15 15:08 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-15 15:08 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-15 15:10 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 15:10 ` Mel Gorman
2010-06-15 16:28 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-06-15 16:28 ` Andrea Arcangeli
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=20100611125455.GC8798@csn.ul.ie \
--to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--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 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.