From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on sub-page writes
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 20:08:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111207120818.GB6549@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111207105340.GF4622@quack.suse.cz>
On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 06:53:40PM +0800, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 28-11-11 21:53:41, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > When dd in 512bytes, generic_perform_write() calls
> > balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited() 8 times for the same page, but
> > obviously the page is only dirtied once.
> Actually, for ppc where pages can be 64 KB the problem is even worse.
Ah yes.
> > Fix it by accounting tsk->nr_dirtied and bdp_ratelimits at page dirty time.
> I was wondering about one more thing - couldn't we rather check in
> generic_perform_write() whether the page was dirty before calling
> ->write_end and call balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited() only if it wasn't?
Cough.. the very original version does that exactly, then you raised
some concern here:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/4/13/554
The discussion goes on and eventually I get to the current version
that looks most acceptable in the three options.
> For generic_perform_write() it doesn't really matter that much since we
> do things page-by-page anyway but other callers could be more efficient...
That's right.
Thanks,
Fengguang
> > Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> > Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> > ---
> > mm/page-writeback.c | 13 +++++--------
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > --- linux-next.orig/mm/page-writeback.c 2011-11-28 21:23:20.000000000 +0800
> > +++ linux-next/mm/page-writeback.c 2011-11-28 21:23:23.000000000 +0800
> > @@ -1239,8 +1239,6 @@ void balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited_nr(
> > if (bdi->dirty_exceeded)
> > ratelimit = min(ratelimit, 32 >> (PAGE_SHIFT - 10));
> >
> > - current->nr_dirtied += nr_pages_dirtied;
> > -
> > preempt_disable();
> > /*
> > * This prevents one CPU to accumulate too many dirtied pages without
> > @@ -1251,12 +1249,9 @@ void balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited_nr(
> > p = &__get_cpu_var(bdp_ratelimits);
> > if (unlikely(current->nr_dirtied >= ratelimit))
> > *p = 0;
> > - else {
> > - *p += nr_pages_dirtied;
> > - if (unlikely(*p >= ratelimit_pages)) {
> > - *p = 0;
> > - ratelimit = 0;
> > - }
> > + else if (unlikely(*p >= ratelimit_pages)) {
> > + *p = 0;
> > + ratelimit = 0;
> > }
> > /*
> > * Pick up the dirtied pages by the exited tasks. This avoids lots of
> > @@ -1749,6 +1744,8 @@ void account_page_dirtied(struct page *p
> > __inc_bdi_stat(mapping->backing_dev_info, BDI_RECLAIMABLE);
> > __inc_bdi_stat(mapping->backing_dev_info, BDI_DIRTIED);
> > task_io_account_write(PAGE_CACHE_SIZE);
> > + current->nr_dirtied++;
> > + this_cpu_inc(bdp_ratelimits);
> > }
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(account_page_dirtied);
> >
> >
> --
> Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-07 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-28 13:53 [PATCH 0/7] dirty throttling bits for 3.3 (v2) Wu Fengguang
2011-11-28 13:53 ` [PATCH 1/7] writeback: balanced_rate cannot exceed write bandwidth Wu Fengguang
2011-12-07 10:21 ` Jan Kara
2011-11-28 13:53 ` [PATCH 2/7] writeback: charge leaked page dirties to active tasks Wu Fengguang
2011-12-07 10:23 ` Jan Kara
2011-11-28 13:53 ` [PATCH 3/7] writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on sub-page writes Wu Fengguang
2011-12-07 10:53 ` Jan Kara
2011-12-07 12:08 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2011-12-07 16:07 ` Jan Kara
2011-12-08 2:44 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-11-28 13:53 ` [PATCH 4/7] writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on redirty Wu Fengguang
2011-12-07 16:09 ` Jan Kara
2011-11-28 13:53 ` [PATCH 5/7] btrfs: fix dirtied pages accounting on sub-page writes Wu Fengguang
2011-11-28 14:16 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-11-28 13:53 ` [PATCH 6/7] writeback: dirty ratelimit - think time compensation Wu Fengguang
2011-12-07 16:14 ` Jan Kara
2011-11-28 13:53 ` [PATCH 7/7] writeback: comment on the bdi dirty threshold Wu Fengguang
2011-12-07 10:57 ` Jan Kara
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=20111207120818.GB6549@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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 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).