linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	thomas.pi@arcor.dea, Yuriy Lalym <ylalym@gmail.com>,
	ltt-dev@lists.casi.polymtl.ca, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm fix page writeback accounting to fix oom condition under heavy I/O
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:12:27 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090210061226.GA1918@Krystal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0902092120450.3048@localhost.localdomain>

* Linus Torvalds (torvalds@linux-foundation.org) wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > 
> > So this patch fixes this behavior by only decrementing the page accounting
> > _after_ the block I/O writepage has been done.
> 
> This makes no sense, really.
> 
> Or rather, I don't mind the notion of updating the counters only after IO 
> per se, and _that_ part of it probably makes sense. But why is it that you 
> only then fix up two of the call-sites. There's a lot more call-sites than 
> that for this function. 
> 
> So if this really makes a big difference, that's an interesting starting 
> point for discussion, but I don't see how this particular patch could 
> possibly be the right thing to do.
> 

Yes, you are right. Looking in more details at /proc/meminfo under the
workload, I notice this :

MemTotal:       16028812 kB
MemFree:        13651440 kB
Buffers:            8944 kB
Cached:          2209456 kB   <--- increments up to ~16GB

        cached = global_page_state(NR_FILE_PAGES) -
                        total_swapcache_pages - i.bufferram;

SwapCached:            0 kB
Active:            34668 kB
Inactive:        2200668 kB   <--- also

                K(pages[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON] + pages[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE]),

Active(anon):      17136 kB
Inactive(anon):        0 kB
Active(file):      17532 kB
Inactive(file):  2200668 kB   <--- also

                K(pages[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE]),

Unevictable:           0 kB
Mlocked:               0 kB
SwapTotal:      19535024 kB
SwapFree:       19535024 kB
Dirty:           1159036 kB
Writeback:             0 kB  <--- stays close to 0
AnonPages:         17060 kB
Mapped:             9476 kB
Slab:              96188 kB
SReclaimable:      79776 kB
SUnreclaim:        16412 kB
PageTables:         3364 kB
NFS_Unstable:          0 kB
Bounce:                0 kB
WritebackTmp:          0 kB
CommitLimit:    27549428 kB
Committed_AS:      54292 kB
VmallocTotal:   34359738367 kB
VmallocUsed:        9960 kB
VmallocChunk:   34359727667 kB
HugePages_Total:       0
HugePages_Free:        0
HugePages_Rsvd:        0
HugePages_Surp:        0
Hugepagesize:       2048 kB
DirectMap4k:        7552 kB
DirectMap2M:    16769024 kB

So I think simply substracting K(pages[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE]) from
avail_dirty in clip_bdi_dirty_limit() and to consider it in
balance_dirty_pages() and throttle_vm_writeout() would probably make my
problem go away, but I would like to understand exactly why this is
needed and if I would need to consider other types of page counts that
would have been forgotten.

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68

--
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>

      parent reply	other threads:[~2009-02-10  6:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20090120122855.GF30821@kernel.dk>
     [not found] ` <20090120232748.GA10605@Krystal>
     [not found]   ` <20090123220009.34DF.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
2009-02-10  3:36     ` [PATCH] mm fix page writeback accounting to fix oom condition under heavy I/O Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-02-10  3:55       ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-10  5:23       ` Linus Torvalds
2009-02-10  5:56         ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-10  6:12         ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]

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=20090210061226.GA1918@Krystal \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ltt-dev@lists.casi.polymtl.ca \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=thomas.pi@arcor.dea \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ylalym@gmail.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).