From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Mel Gorman <mel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Itaru Kitayama <kitayama@cl.bb4u.ne.jp>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4/6] writeback: the kupdate expire timestamp should be a moving target
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:03:40 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110420080918.202774212@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20110420080336.441157866@intel.com
[-- Attachment #1: writeback-moving-dirty-expired.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2039 bytes --]
Dynamically compute the dirty expire timestamp at queue_io() time.
writeback_control.older_than_this used to be determined at entrance to
the kupdate writeback work. This _static_ timestamp may go stale if the
kupdate work runs on and on. The flusher may then stuck with some old
busy inodes, never considering newly expired inodes thereafter.
This has two possible problems:
- It is unfair for a large dirty inode to delay (for a long time) the
writeback of small dirty inodes.
- As time goes by, the large and busy dirty inode may contain only
_freshly_ dirtied pages. Ignoring newly expired dirty inodes risks
delaying the expired dirty pages to the end of LRU lists, triggering
the evil pageout(). Nevertheless this patch merely addresses part
of the problem.
v2: keep policy changes inside wb_writeback() and keep the
wbc.older_than_this visibility as suggested by Dave.
CC: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Signed-off-by: Itaru Kitayama <kitayama@cl.bb4u.ne.jp>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
---
fs/fs-writeback.c | 11 ++++++-----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
--- linux-next.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c 2011-04-20 12:02:57.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-next/fs/fs-writeback.c 2011-04-20 12:03:23.000000000 +0800
@@ -661,11 +661,6 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writ
long write_chunk;
struct inode *inode;
- if (wbc.for_kupdate) {
- wbc.older_than_this = &oldest_jif;
- oldest_jif = jiffies -
- msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_expire_interval * 10);
- }
if (!wbc.range_cyclic) {
wbc.range_start = 0;
wbc.range_end = LLONG_MAX;
@@ -714,6 +709,12 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writ
if (work->for_background && !over_bground_thresh())
break;
+ if (work->for_kupdate) {
+ oldest_jif = jiffies -
+ msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_expire_interval * 10);
+ wbc.older_than_this = &oldest_jif;
+ }
+
wbc.more_io = 0;
wbc.nr_to_write = write_chunk;
wbc.pages_skipped = 0;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-20 8:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-20 8:03 [PATCH 0/6] writeback: moving expire targets for background/kupdate works v2 Wu Fengguang
2011-04-20 8:03 ` [PATCH 1/6] writeback: pass writeback_control down to move_expired_inodes() Wu Fengguang
2011-05-04 11:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-04 11:13 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-20 8:03 ` [PATCH 2/6] writeback: introduce writeback_control.inodes_cleaned Wu Fengguang
2011-05-04 11:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-04 11:11 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-04 11:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-04 11:32 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-20 8:03 ` [PATCH 3/6] writeback: try more writeback as long as something was written Wu Fengguang
2011-04-20 8:03 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2011-04-20 8:03 ` [PATCH 5/6] writeback: sync expired inodes first in background writeback Wu Fengguang
2011-04-20 23:40 ` Andrew Morton
2011-04-21 1:14 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-21 1:21 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-24 3:15 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-26 12:17 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-26 13:51 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-26 13:59 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-26 14:05 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-27 11:15 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-04-20 8:03 ` [PATCH 6/6] writeback: refill b_io iff empty Wu Fengguang
2011-05-04 7:39 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-05 16:37 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-05 16:47 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-06 5:29 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-06 8:42 ` [RFC][PATCH] writeback: limit number of moved inodes in queue_io() Wu Fengguang
2011-05-06 10:06 ` [RFC][PATCH v2] " Wu Fengguang
2011-05-06 23:06 ` Dave Chinner
2011-05-06 14:21 ` [PATCH 6/6] writeback: refill b_io iff empty Jan Kara
2011-05-10 4:31 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-05-10 4:53 ` Dave Chinner
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=20110420080918.202774212@intel.com \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kitayama@cl.bb4u.ne.jp \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=mel@linux.vnet.ibm.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).