All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Linux-Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] mm: Throttle direct reclaimers if PF_MEMALLOC reserves are low and swap is backed by network storage
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:14:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110428101446.GP4658@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110428102244.6e1113e9@notabene.brown>

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:22:44AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:08:10 +0100 Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
> 
> 
> > +/*
> > + * Throttle direct reclaimers if backing storage is backed by the network
> > + * and the PFMEMALLOC reserve for the preferred node is getting dangerously
> > + * depleted. kswapd will continue to make progress and wake the processes
> > + * when the low watermark is reached
> > + */
> > +static void throttle_direct_reclaim(gfp_t gfp_mask, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > +					nodemask_t *nodemask)
> > +{
> > +	struct zone *zone;
> > +	int high_zoneidx = gfp_zone(gfp_mask);
> > +	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> > +
> > +	/* Check if the pfmemalloc reserves are ok */
> > +	first_zones_zonelist(zonelist, high_zoneidx, NULL, &zone);
> > +	if (pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(zone->zone_pgdat, high_zoneidx))
> > +		return;
> 
> As the first thing that 'wait_event_interruptible" does is test the condition
> and return if it is true, this "if () return;" is pointless.
>  

In patch 13, we count the number of times we got throttled. In this
patch, the check is pointless but it makes sense in the context of
the following patch.

> > +
> > +	/* Throttle */
> > +	wait_event_interruptible(zone->zone_pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait,
> > +		pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(zone->zone_pgdat, high_zoneidx));
> > +}
> 
> I was surprised that you chose wait_event_interruptible as your previous code
> was almost exactly "wait_event_killable".
> 
> Is there some justification for not throttling processes which happen to have
> a (non-fatal) signal pending?
> 

No justification, wait_event_killable() is indeed a better fit.

> > +
> >  unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist, int order,
> >  				gfp_t gfp_mask, nodemask_t *nodemask)
> >  {
> > @@ -2133,6 +2172,15 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist, int order,
> >  		.nodemask = nodemask,
> >  	};
> >  
> > +	throttle_direct_reclaim(gfp_mask, zonelist, nodemask);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Do not enter reclaim if fatal signal is pending. 1 is returned so
> > +	 * that the page allocator does not consider triggering OOM
> > +	 */
> > +	if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
> > +		return 1;
> > +
> >  	trace_mm_vmscan_direct_reclaim_begin(order,
> >  				sc.may_writepage,
> >  				gfp_mask);
> > @@ -2488,6 +2536,12 @@ loop_again:
> >  			}
> >  
> >  		}
> > +
> > +		/* Wake throttled direct reclaimers if low watermark is met */
> > +		if (waitqueue_active(&pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait) &&
> > +				pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(pgdat, MAX_NR_ZONES - 1))
> > +			wake_up_interruptible(&pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait);
> > +
> >  		if (all_zones_ok || (order && pgdat_balanced(pgdat, balanced, *classzone_idx)))
> >  			break;		/* kswapd: all done */
> >  		/*
> 

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Linux-Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] mm: Throttle direct reclaimers if PF_MEMALLOC reserves are low and swap is backed by network storage
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:14:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110428101446.GP4658@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110428102244.6e1113e9@notabene.brown>

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:22:44AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:08:10 +0100 Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
> 
> 
> > +/*
> > + * Throttle direct reclaimers if backing storage is backed by the network
> > + * and the PFMEMALLOC reserve for the preferred node is getting dangerously
> > + * depleted. kswapd will continue to make progress and wake the processes
> > + * when the low watermark is reached
> > + */
> > +static void throttle_direct_reclaim(gfp_t gfp_mask, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > +					nodemask_t *nodemask)
> > +{
> > +	struct zone *zone;
> > +	int high_zoneidx = gfp_zone(gfp_mask);
> > +	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> > +
> > +	/* Check if the pfmemalloc reserves are ok */
> > +	first_zones_zonelist(zonelist, high_zoneidx, NULL, &zone);
> > +	if (pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(zone->zone_pgdat, high_zoneidx))
> > +		return;
> 
> As the first thing that 'wait_event_interruptible" does is test the condition
> and return if it is true, this "if () return;" is pointless.
>  

In patch 13, we count the number of times we got throttled. In this
patch, the check is pointless but it makes sense in the context of
the following patch.

> > +
> > +	/* Throttle */
> > +	wait_event_interruptible(zone->zone_pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait,
> > +		pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(zone->zone_pgdat, high_zoneidx));
> > +}
> 
> I was surprised that you chose wait_event_interruptible as your previous code
> was almost exactly "wait_event_killable".
> 
> Is there some justification for not throttling processes which happen to have
> a (non-fatal) signal pending?
> 

No justification, wait_event_killable() is indeed a better fit.

> > +
> >  unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist, int order,
> >  				gfp_t gfp_mask, nodemask_t *nodemask)
> >  {
> > @@ -2133,6 +2172,15 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist, int order,
> >  		.nodemask = nodemask,
> >  	};
> >  
> > +	throttle_direct_reclaim(gfp_mask, zonelist, nodemask);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Do not enter reclaim if fatal signal is pending. 1 is returned so
> > +	 * that the page allocator does not consider triggering OOM
> > +	 */
> > +	if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
> > +		return 1;
> > +
> >  	trace_mm_vmscan_direct_reclaim_begin(order,
> >  				sc.may_writepage,
> >  				gfp_mask);
> > @@ -2488,6 +2536,12 @@ loop_again:
> >  			}
> >  
> >  		}
> > +
> > +		/* Wake throttled direct reclaimers if low watermark is met */
> > +		if (waitqueue_active(&pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait) &&
> > +				pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(pgdat, MAX_NR_ZONES - 1))
> > +			wake_up_interruptible(&pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait);
> > +
> >  		if (all_zones_ok || (order && pgdat_balanced(pgdat, balanced, *classzone_idx)))
> >  			break;		/* kswapd: all done */
> >  		/*
> 

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2011-04-28 10:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-04-27 16:07 [PATCH 00/13] Swap-over-NBD without deadlocking v3 Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:07 ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:07 ` [PATCH 01/13] mm: Serialize access to min_free_kbytes Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:07   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 02/13] mm: sl[au]b: Add knowledge of PFMEMALLOC reserve pages Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 03/13] mm: Introduce __GFP_MEMALLOC to allow access to emergency reserves Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 04/13] mm: allow PF_MEMALLOC from softirq context Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 05/13] mm: Ignore mempolicies when using ALLOC_NO_WATERMARK Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 06/13] net: Introduce sk_allocation() to allow addition of GFP flags depending on the individual socket Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 07/13] netvm: Allow the use of __GFP_MEMALLOC by specific sockets Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 08/13] netvm: Allow skb allocation to use PFMEMALLOC reserves Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-28  6:19   ` NeilBrown
2011-04-28  6:19     ` NeilBrown
2011-04-28 10:05     ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-28 10:05       ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-28 10:47       ` NeilBrown
2011-04-28 10:47         ` NeilBrown
2011-04-28 11:18         ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-28 11:18           ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-29  2:55           ` NeilBrown
2011-04-29  2:55             ` NeilBrown
2011-05-03 11:45             ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-03 11:45               ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 09/13] netvm: Set PF_MEMALLOC as appropriate during SKB processing Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 10/13] mm: Micro-optimise slab to avoid a function call Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 11/13] nbd: Set SOCK_MEMALLOC for access to PFMEMALLOC reserves Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 12/13] mm: Throttle direct reclaimers if PF_MEMALLOC reserves are low and swap is backed by network storage Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-28  0:22   ` NeilBrown
2011-04-28  0:22     ` NeilBrown
2011-04-28 10:14     ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2011-04-28 10:14       ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08 ` [PATCH 13/13] mm: Account for the number of times direct reclaimers get throttled Mel Gorman
2011-04-27 16:08   ` Mel Gorman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-04-26  7:36 [PATCH 00/13] Swap-over-NBD without deadlocking Mel Gorman
2011-04-26  7:36 ` [PATCH 12/13] mm: Throttle direct reclaimers if PF_MEMALLOC reserves are low and swap is backed by network storage Mel Gorman
2011-04-26  7:36   ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-26 12:30   ` NeilBrown
2011-04-26 12:30     ` NeilBrown
2011-04-26 14:26     ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-26 14:26       ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-26 23:18       ` NeilBrown
2011-04-26 23:18         ` NeilBrown
2011-04-27  8:36         ` Mel Gorman
2011-04-27  8:36           ` Mel Gorman

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=20110428101446.GP4658@suse.de \
    --to=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.