From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
raghu.prabhu13@gmail.com, jack@suse.cz, chris.mason@oracle.com,
cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org, riel@redhat.com,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: vmscan: Correctly check if reclaimer should schedule during shrink_slab
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 12:36:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305804982.2145.6.camel@lenovo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimUJeTbWV_0BzgjrDjY=Wpc-PaG5Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 09:09 +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Hi Colin.
>
> Sorry for bothering you. :(
No problem at all, I've very happy to re-test.
> I hope this test is last.
>
> We(Mel, KOSAKI and me) finalized opinion.
>
> Could you test below patch with patch[1/4] of Mel's series(ie,
> !pgdat_balanced of sleeping_prematurely)?
> If it is successful, we will try to merge this version instead of
> various cond_resched sprinkling version.
tested with the patch below + patch[1/4] of Mel's series. 300 cycles,
2.5 hrs of soak testing: works OK.
Colin
>
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
> > It has been reported on some laptops that kswapd is consuming large
> > amounts of CPU and not being scheduled when SLUB is enabled during
> > large amounts of file copying. It is expected that this is due to
> > kswapd missing every cond_resched() point because;
> >
> > shrink_page_list() calls cond_resched() if inactive pages were isolated
> > which in turn may not happen if all_unreclaimable is set in
> > shrink_zones(). If for whatver reason, all_unreclaimable is
> > set on all zones, we can miss calling cond_resched().
> >
> > balance_pgdat() only calls cond_resched if the zones are not
> > balanced. For a high-order allocation that is balanced, it
> > checks order-0 again. During that window, order-0 might have
> > become unbalanced so it loops again for order-0 and returns
> > that it was reclaiming for order-0 to kswapd(). It can then
> > find that a caller has rewoken kswapd for a high-order and
> > re-enters balance_pgdat() without ever calling cond_resched().
> >
> > shrink_slab only calls cond_resched() if we are reclaiming slab
> > pages. If there are a large number of direct reclaimers, the
> > shrinker_rwsem can be contended and prevent kswapd calling
> > cond_resched().
> >
> > This patch modifies the shrink_slab() case. If the semaphore is
> > contended, the caller will still check cond_resched(). After each
> > successful call into a shrinker, the check for cond_resched() is
> > still necessary in case one shrinker call is particularly slow.
> >
> > This patch replaces
> > mm-vmscan-if-kswapd-has-been-running-too-long-allow-it-to-sleep.patch
> > in -mm.
> >
> > [mgorman@suse.de: Preserve call to cond_resched after each call into shrinker]
> > From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
> > ---
> > mm/vmscan.c | 9 +++++++--
> > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > index af24d1e..0bed248 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -230,8 +230,11 @@ unsigned long shrink_slab(unsigned long scanned, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > if (scanned == 0)
> > scanned = SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX;
> >
> > - if (!down_read_trylock(&shrinker_rwsem))
> > - return 1; /* Assume we'll be able to shrink next time */
> > + if (!down_read_trylock(&shrinker_rwsem)) {
> > + /* Assume we'll be able to shrink next time */
> > + ret = 1;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> >
> > list_for_each_entry(shrinker, &shrinker_list, list) {
> > unsigned long long delta;
> > @@ -282,6 +285,8 @@ unsigned long shrink_slab(unsigned long scanned, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > shrinker->nr += total_scan;
> > }
> > up_read(&shrinker_rwsem);
> > +out:
> > + cond_resched();
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> >
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-19 11:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-13 14:03 [PATCH 0/4] Reduce impact to overall system of SLUB using high-order allocations V2 Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 14:03 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm: vmscan: Correct use of pgdat_balanced in sleeping_prematurely Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 14:28 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-05-14 16:30 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2011-05-13 14:03 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm: slub: Do not wake kswapd for SLUBs speculative high-order allocations Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 21:10 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-18 6:09 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-18 17:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-13 14:03 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm: slub: Do not take expensive steps " Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 21:16 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-17 8:42 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 13:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 17:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-17 19:35 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-17 19:31 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-13 14:03 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm: vmscan: If kswapd has been running too long, allow it to sleep Mel Gorman
2011-05-15 10:27 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-16 4:21 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-16 5:04 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 8:45 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 8:58 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 10:27 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 23:50 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-17 0:48 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-17 10:38 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 13:50 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-17 16:15 ` [PATCH] mm: vmscan: Correctly check if reclaimer should schedule during shrink_slab Mel Gorman
2011-05-18 0:45 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-19 0:03 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-19 0:09 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-19 11:36 ` Colin Ian King [this message]
2011-05-20 0:06 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 4:19 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm: vmscan: If kswapd has been running too long, allow it to sleep Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 7:39 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-18 4:09 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-18 1:05 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 5:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 6:05 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 9:58 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-18 22:55 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 23:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 0:26 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 9:57 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 8:45 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2011-05-13 15:19 ` [PATCH 0/4] Reduce impact to overall system of SLUB using high-order allocations V2 James Bottomley
2011-05-13 15:52 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 15:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-13 15:43 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-14 8:34 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-16 8:37 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 11:24 ` Colin Ian King
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=1305804982.2145.6.camel@lenovo \
--to=colin.king@canonical.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=raghu.prabhu13@gmail.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).