From: Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@google.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>, jack@suse.cz
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] mm: Implement IO-less balance_dirty_pages()
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:53:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikMv02oQC685RhSNvKnN1bsP=KNRpWfTgnuXF9g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikshHSaqfs7_CzL3ofyAV96_NZsOw4dcNbPtnC1@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@google.com> wrote:
> Hi Jan:
>
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 09:48:21PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
>>> On Wed 09-03-11 19:07:31, Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>> > > +static void balance_dirty_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
>>> > > + unsigned long write_chunk)
>>> > > +{
>>> > > + struct backing_dev_info *bdi = mapping->backing_dev_info;
>>> > > + struct balance_waiter bw;
>>> > > + struct dirty_limit_state st;
>>> > > + int dirty_exceeded = check_dirty_limits(bdi, &st);
>>> > > +
>>> > > + if (dirty_exceeded < DIRTY_MAY_EXCEED_LIMIT ||
>>> > > + (dirty_exceeded == DIRTY_MAY_EXCEED_LIMIT &&
>>> > > + !bdi_task_limit_exceeded(&st, current))) {
>>> > > + if (bdi->dirty_exceeded &&
>>> > > + dirty_exceeded < DIRTY_MAY_EXCEED_LIMIT)
>>> > > + bdi->dirty_exceeded = 0;
>>> > > /*
>>> > > - * Increase the delay for each loop, up to our previous
>>> > > - * default of taking a 100ms nap.
>>> > > + * In laptop mode, we wait until hitting the higher threshold
>>> > > + * before starting background writeout, and then write out all
>>> > > + * the way down to the lower threshold. So slow writers cause
>>> > > + * minimal disk activity.
>>> > > + *
>>> > > + * In normal mode, we start background writeout at the lower
>>> > > + * background_thresh, to keep the amount of dirty memory low.
>>> > > */
>>> > > - pause <<= 1;
>>> > > - if (pause > HZ / 10)
>>> > > - pause = HZ / 10;
>>> > > + if (!laptop_mode && dirty_exceeded == DIRTY_EXCEED_BACKGROUND)
>>> > > + bdi_start_background_writeback(bdi);
>>> > > + return;
>>> > > }
>>> > >
>>> > > - /* Clear dirty_exceeded flag only when no task can exceed the limit */
>>> > > - if (!min_dirty_exceeded && bdi->dirty_exceeded)
>>> > > - bdi->dirty_exceeded = 0;
>>> > > + if (!bdi->dirty_exceeded)
>>> > > + bdi->dirty_exceeded = 1;
>>> >
>>> > Will it make sense to move out bdi_task_limit_exceeded() check in a
>>> > separate if condition statement as follows. May be this is little
>>> > easier to read.
>>> >
>>> > if (dirty_exceeded < DIRTY_MAY_EXCEED_LIMIT) {
>>> > if (bdi->dirty_exceeded)
>>> > bdi->dirty_exceeded = 0;
>>> >
>>> > if (!laptop_mode && dirty_exceeded == DIRTY_EXCEED_BACKGROUND)
>>> > bdi_start_background_writeback(bdi);
>>> >
>>> > return;
>>> > }
>>> >
>>> > if (dirty_exceeded == DIRTY_MAY_EXCEED_LIMIT &&
>>> > !bdi_task_limit_exceeded(&st, current))
>>> > return;
>>> But then we have to start background writeback here as well. Which is
>>> actually a bug in the original patch as well! So clearly your way is more
>>> readable :) I'll change it. Thanks.
>>
>> I was thinking about that starting of bdi writeback here. But I was
>> assuming that if we are here then we most likely have visited above
>> loop of < DIRTY_MAY_EXCEED_LIMIT and started background writeback.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but at the point in balance_dirty_pages()
> where we kick the flusher thread , before we put the current task to
> sleep, how do you know that background writeback is taking place? Are
> you simply assuming that in previous calls to balance_dirty_pages(),
> that background writeback has been started, and is still taking place
> at the time we need to do throttling?
Never mind, I see that I'm not completely familiar with the writeback
changes for 2.6.38. I see where we'll kick of BG writeback in
wb_check_background_flush() once we kick the flusher thread.
Curt
>
> Thanks,
> Curt
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Vivek
>>
>> --
>> 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/ .
>> Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
>> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
>>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-16 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-08 22:31 [PATCH RFC 0/5] IO-less balance_dirty_pages() v2 (simple approach) Jan Kara
2011-03-08 22:31 ` [PATCH 1/5] writeback: account per-bdi accumulated written pages Jan Kara
2011-03-08 22:31 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: Properly reflect task dirty limits in dirty_exceeded logic Jan Kara
2011-03-09 21:02 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-14 20:44 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-15 15:21 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-08 22:31 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm: Implement IO-less balance_dirty_pages() Jan Kara
2011-03-10 0:07 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-14 20:48 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-15 15:23 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-16 21:26 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-03-16 22:53 ` Curt Wohlgemuth [this message]
2011-03-16 16:53 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-16 19:10 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-16 19:31 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-16 19:58 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-16 20:22 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-08 22:31 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm: Remove low limit from sync_writeback_pages() Jan Kara
2011-03-08 22:31 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm: Autotune interval between distribution of page completions Jan Kara
2011-03-17 15:46 ` [PATCH RFC 0/5] IO-less balance_dirty_pages() v2 (simple approach) Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-03-17 15:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-17 16:24 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-03-17 16:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-17 17:32 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-17 18:55 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-03-17 22:56 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-18 14:30 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-03-22 21:43 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-23 4:41 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-25 12:59 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-03-25 13:44 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-03-25 23:05 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-28 2:44 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-03-28 15:08 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-29 1:44 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-03-29 2:14 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-29 2:41 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-03-29 5:59 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-29 7:31 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-03-29 7:52 ` Wu Fengguang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-02-04 1:38 [RFC PATCH 0/5] IO-less balance dirty pages Jan Kara
2011-02-04 1:38 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm: Implement IO-less balance_dirty_pages() Jan Kara
2011-02-04 13:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-02-11 14:56 ` Jan Kara
2011-02-04 13:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-02-04 13:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-02-11 15:46 ` Jan Kara
2011-02-22 15:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-02-04 13:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-02-11 14:56 ` 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='AANLkTikMv02oQC685RhSNvKnN1bsP=KNRpWfTgnuXF9g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=curtw@google.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=vgoyal@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).