Re: Bug in kernel 2.6.31, Slow wb_kupdate writeout

[Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:11:10PM +0800, Martin Bligh wrote:
> > --- mm.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > +++ mm/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > @@ -325,7 +325,8 @@ __sync_single_inode(struct inode *inode,
> > A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  * soon as the queue becomes uncongested.
> > A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  */
> > A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
> > - A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0) {
> > + A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0 ||
> > + A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  wbc->encountered_congestion) {
> > A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A /*
> > A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  * slice used up: queue for next turn
> > A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  */
> >
> 
> That's not sufficient - it only the problem in the wb_kupdate path. If you want
> to be more conservative, how about we do this?

I agree on the unification of kupdate and sync paths. In fact I had a
patch for doing this. And I'd recommend to do it in two patches:
one to fix the congestion case, another to do the code unification.

The sync path don't care whether requeue_io() or redirty_tail() is
used, because they disregard the time stamps totally - only order of
inodes matters (ie. starvation), which is same for requeue_io()/redirty_tail().

Thanks,
Fengguang

> --- linux-2.6.30/fs/fs-writeback.c.old  2009-07-29 00:08:29.000000000 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.30/fs/fs-writeback.c      2009-07-29 07:08:48.000000000 -0700
> @@ -323,43 +323,14 @@ __sync_single_inode(struct inode *inode,
>                          * We didn't write back all the pages.  nfs_writepages(
> )
>                          * sometimes bales out without doing anything. Redirty
>                          * the inode; Move it from s_io onto s_more_io/s_dirty.
> +                        * It may well have just encountered congestion
>                          */
> -                       /*
> -                        * akpm: if the caller was the kupdate function we put
> -                        * this inode at the head of s_dirty so it gets first
> -                        * consideration.  Otherwise, move it to the tail, for
> -                        * the reasons described there.  I'm not really sure
> -                        * how much sense this makes.  Presumably I had a good
> -                        * reasons for doing it this way, and I'd rather not
> -                        * muck with it at present.
> -                        */
> -                       if (wbc->for_kupdate) {
> -                               /*
> -                                * For the kupdate function we move the inode
> -                                * to s_more_io so it will get more writeout as
> -                                * soon as the queue becomes uncongested.
> -                                */
> -                               inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
> -                               if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0) {
> -                                       /*
> -                                        * slice used up: queue for next turn
> -                                        */
> -                                       requeue_io(inode);
> -                               } else {
> -                                       /*
> -                                        * somehow blocked: retry later
> -                                        */
> -                                       redirty_tail(inode);
> -                               }
> -                       } else {
> -                               /*
> -                                * Otherwise fully redirty the inode so that
> -                                * other inodes on this superblock will get som
> e
> -                                * writeout.  Otherwise heavy writing to one
> -                                * file would indefinitely suspend writeout of
> -                                * all the other files.
> -                                */
> -                               inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
> +                       inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
> +                       if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0 ||     /* sliced used up */
> +                            wbc->encountered_congestion)
> +                               requeue_io(inode);
> +                       else {
> +                               /* somehow blocked: retry later */
>                                 redirty_tail(inode);
>                         }
>                 } else if (inode->i_state & I_DIRTY) {

--
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>