From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] writeback: try more writeback as long as something was written
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 00:50:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100805225013.GC17416@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100805223929.GC5586@localhost>
On Fri 06-08-10 06:39:29, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 01:00:16AM +0800, Jan Kara wrote:
> > I'm just afraid that in some
> > pathological cases this could result in bad writeback pattern - like if
> > there is some process which manages to dirty just a few pages while we are
> > doing writeout, this looping could result in writing just a few pages in
> > each round which is bad for fragmentation etc.
>
> Such inodes will be redirty_tail()ed here:
>
> if (mapping_tagged(mapping, PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY)) {
> /*
> * We didn't write back all the pages. nfs_writepages()
> * sometimes bales out without doing anything.
> */
> inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES;
> if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0) {
> /*
> * slice used up: queue for next turn
> */
> requeue_io(inode);
> } else {
> /*
> * Writeback blocked by something other than
> * congestion. Delay the inode for some time to
> * avoid spinning on the CPU (100% iowait)
> * retrying writeback of the dirty page/inode
> * that cannot be performed immediately.
> */
> redirty_tail(inode);
> }
Yes. And then, when there are no inodes in b_more_io, they get queued
again for writeback. So for non-background WB_SYNC_NONE writeback we can
just write a few pages over and over again... Oh, ok we won't because of
my start_time fix I suppose. Maybe a comment about this by the nr_to_write
< MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES check would be good.
> > Actually, this comment probably also applies to your patch where you
> > change the queueing logic in writeback_single_inode(), doesn't it?
>
> Can you elaborate?
Sorry, my comment only applies to this particular patch. In your change
to writeback_single_inode() you requeue_io() only if nr_to_write <= 0.
Honza
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-05 22:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-05 16:10 [PATCH 00/13] writeback patches for 2.6.36 Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 01/13] writeback: reduce calls to global_page_state in balance_dirty_pages() Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 02/13] writeback: avoid unnecessary calculation of bdi dirty thresholds Wu Fengguang
2010-08-06 10:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 03/13] writeback: add comment to the dirty limits functions Wu Fengguang
2010-08-06 10:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-07 16:47 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 04/13] writeback: dont redirty tail an inode with dirty pages Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 05/13] writeback: fix queue_io() ordering Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 06/13] writeback: merge for_kupdate and !for_kupdate cases Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 07/13] writeback: explicit low bound for vm.dirty_ratio Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 23:34 ` Andrew Morton
2010-08-06 12:44 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-10 3:12 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-08-10 3:57 ` Neil Brown
2010-08-10 13:29 ` Jan Kara
2010-08-10 18:12 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-10 18:06 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 08/13] writeback: pass writeback_control down to move_expired_inodes() Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 09/13] writeback: the kupdate expire timestamp should be a moving target Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 10/13] writeback: kill writeback_control.more_io Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 11/13] writeback: sync expired inodes first in background writeback Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 12/13] writeback: try more writeback as long as something was written Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 17:00 ` Jan Kara
2010-08-05 22:39 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 22:50 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 13/13] writeback: introduce writeback_control.inodes_written Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 23:08 ` [PATCH 00/13] writeback patches for 2.6.36 Andrew Morton
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=20100805225013.GC17416@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
/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).