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 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).