linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 21:31:56 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100913133156.GA12355@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1283770053-18833-10-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie>

Mel,

Sorry for being late, I'm doing pretty much prework these days ;)

On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 06:47:32PM +0800, Mel Gorman 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 filesystem pages by checking
> if current is kswapd or the page is anonymous before writing back.  If the
> dirty pages cannot be written back, they 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 stall for
> the background flusher before trying to reclaim the pages again.
> 
> As the call-chain for writing anonymous pages is not expected to be deep
> and they are not cleaned by flusher threads, anonymous pages are still
> written back in direct reclaim.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> ---
>  mm/vmscan.c |   49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index ff52b46..408c101 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -145,6 +145,9 @@ static DECLARE_RWSEM(shrinker_rwsem);
>  #define scanning_global_lru(sc)	(1)
>  #endif
>  
> +/* Direct lumpy reclaim waits up to five seconds for background cleaning */
> +#define MAX_SWAP_CLEAN_WAIT 50
> +
>  static struct zone_reclaim_stat *get_reclaim_stat(struct zone *zone,
>  						  struct scan_control *sc)
>  {
> @@ -682,11 +685,13 @@ static noinline_for_stack void free_page_list(struct list_head *free_pages)
>   * shrink_page_list() returns the number of reclaimed pages
>   */
>  static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
> -				      struct scan_control *sc)
> +					struct scan_control *sc,
> +					unsigned long *nr_still_dirty)
>  {
>  	LIST_HEAD(ret_pages);
>  	LIST_HEAD(free_pages);
>  	int pgactivate = 0;
> +	unsigned long nr_dirty = 0;
>  	unsigned long nr_reclaimed = 0;
>  
>  	cond_resched();
> @@ -785,6 +790,15 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
>  		}
>  
>  		if (PageDirty(page)) {
> +			/*
> +			 * Only kswapd can writeback filesystem pages to
> +			 * avoid risk of stack overflow
> +			 */
> +			if (page_is_file_cache(page) && !current_is_kswapd()) {
> +				nr_dirty++;
> +				goto keep_locked;
> +			}
> +
>  			if (references == PAGEREF_RECLAIM_CLEAN)
>  				goto keep_locked;
>  			if (!may_enter_fs)
> @@ -908,6 +922,8 @@ keep_lumpy:
>  	free_page_list(&free_pages);
>  
>  	list_splice(&ret_pages, page_list);
> +
> +	*nr_still_dirty = nr_dirty;
>  	count_vm_events(PGACTIVATE, pgactivate);
>  	return nr_reclaimed;
>  }
> @@ -1312,6 +1328,10 @@ static inline bool should_reclaim_stall(unsigned long nr_taken,
>  	if (sc->lumpy_reclaim_mode == LUMPY_MODE_NONE)
>  		return false;
>  
> +	/* If we cannot writeback, there is no point stalling */
> +	if (!sc->may_writepage)
> +		return false;
> +
>  	/* If we have relaimed everything on the isolated list, no stall */
>  	if (nr_freed == nr_taken)
>  		return false;
> @@ -1339,11 +1359,13 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct zone *zone,
>  			struct scan_control *sc, int priority, int file)
>  {
>  	LIST_HEAD(page_list);
> +	LIST_HEAD(putback_list);
>  	unsigned long nr_scanned;
>  	unsigned long nr_reclaimed = 0;
>  	unsigned long nr_taken;
>  	unsigned long nr_anon;
>  	unsigned long nr_file;
> +	unsigned long nr_dirty;
>  
>  	while (unlikely(too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc))) {
>  		congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
> @@ -1392,14 +1414,35 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct zone *zone,
>  
>  	spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
>  
> -	nr_reclaimed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, sc);
> +	nr_reclaimed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, sc, &nr_dirty);
>  
>  	/* Check if we should syncronously wait for writeback */
>  	if (should_reclaim_stall(nr_taken, nr_reclaimed, priority, sc)) {

It is possible to OOM if the LRU list is small and/or the storage is slow, so
that the flusher cannot clean enough pages before the LRU is fully scanned.

So we may need do waits on dirty/writeback pages on *order-0*
direct reclaims, when priority goes rather low (such as < 3).

> +		int dirty_retry = MAX_SWAP_CLEAN_WAIT;
>  		set_lumpy_reclaim_mode(priority, sc, true);
> -		nr_reclaimed += shrink_page_list(&page_list, sc);
> +
> +		while (nr_reclaimed < nr_taken && nr_dirty && dirty_retry--) {
> +			struct page *page, *tmp;
> +

> +			/* Take off the clean pages marked for activation */
> +			list_for_each_entry_safe(page, tmp, &page_list, lru) {
> +				if (PageDirty(page) || PageWriteback(page))
> +					continue;
> +
> +				list_del(&page->lru);
> +				list_add(&page->lru, &putback_list);
> +			}

nitpick: I guess the above loop is optional code to avoid overheads
of shrink_page_list() repeatedly going through some unfreeable pages?
Considering this is the slow code path, I'd prefer to keep the code
simple than to do such optimizations.

> +			wakeup_flusher_threads(laptop_mode ? 0 : nr_dirty);

how about 
                        if (!laptop_mode)
                                wakeup_flusher_threads(nr_dirty);

> +			wait_iff_congested(zone, BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
> +
> +			nr_reclaimed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, sc,
> +							&nr_dirty);
> +		}
>  	}
>  
> +	list_splice(&putback_list, &page_list);
> +
>  	local_irq_disable();
>  	if (current_is_kswapd())
>  		__count_vm_events(KSWAPD_STEAL, nr_reclaimed);
> -- 
> 1.7.1

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-13 13:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-06 10:47 [PATCH 0/9] Reduce latencies and improve overall reclaim efficiency v1 Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 01/10] tracing, vmscan: Add trace events for LRU list shrinking Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 02/10] writeback: Account for time spent congestion_waited Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 03/10] writeback: Do not congestion sleep if there are no congested BDIs or significant writeback Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:25   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08 11:04     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-08 14:52       ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-09  8:54         ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-12 15:37           ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-13  8:55             ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13  9:48               ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-13 10:07                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 10:20                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-13 10:30                     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-08 21:23   ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-09 10:43     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-09  3:02   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-09  8:58     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 04/10] vmscan: Synchronous lumpy reclaim should not call congestion_wait() Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:26   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08  6:15   ` Johannes Weiner
2010-09-08 11:25   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-09  3:03   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 05/10] vmscan: Synchrounous lumpy reclaim use lock_page() instead trylock_page() Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:28   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08  6:16   ` Johannes Weiner
2010-09-08 11:28   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-09  3:04   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-09  3:15     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-09  3:25       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-09  4:13       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-09  9:22         ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-10 10:25           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-10 10:33             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-13  9:14             ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-14 10:14               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 06/10] vmscan: Narrow the scenarios lumpy reclaim uses synchrounous reclaim Mel Gorman
2010-09-09  3:14   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 07/10] vmscan: Remove dead code in shrink_inactive_list() Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:33   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 08/10] vmscan: isolated_lru_pages() stop neighbour search if neighbour cannot be isolated Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:37   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08 11:12     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-08 14:58       ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08 11:37   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-08 12:50     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-08 13:14       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-08 13:27         ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-09  3:17   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 09/10] vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 13:31   ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2010-09-13 13:55     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 14:33       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-28 21:50   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-10-29 10:26     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 10/10] vmscan: Kick flusher threads to clean pages when reclaim is encountering dirty pages Mel Gorman
2010-09-09  3:22   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-09  9:32     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13  0:53       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-13 13:48   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-13 14:10     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 14:41       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-06 10:49 ` [PATCH 0/9] Reduce latencies and improve overall reclaim efficiency v1 Mel Gorman
2010-09-08  3:14 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-08  8:38   ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 23:10 ` Minchan Kim

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=20100913133156.GA12355@localhost \
    --to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=minchan.kim@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).