From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
David Cohen <david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Damien Ramonda <damien.ramonda@intel.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm readahead: Fix the readahead fail in case of empty numa node
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 11:27:53 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52A015E1.50005@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131204134838.a048880a1db9e9acd14a39e4@linux-foundation.org>
On 12/05/2013 03:18 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 14:38:11 +0530 Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/04/2013 02:11 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> :
> : This patch takes it all out and applies the same upper limit as is used in
> : sys_readahead() - half the inactive list.
> :
> : +/*
> : + * Given a desired number of PAGE_CACHE_SIZE readahead pages, return a
> : + * sensible upper limit.
> : + */
> : +unsigned long max_sane_readahead(unsigned long nr)
> : +{
> : + unsigned long active;
> : + unsigned long inactive;
> : +
> : + get_zone_counts(&active, &inactive);
> : + return min(nr, inactive / 2);
> : +}
>
Hi Andrew, Thanks for digging out. So it seems like earlier we had not
even considered free pages?
> And one would need to go back further still to understand the rationale
> for the sys_readahead() decision and that even predates the BK repo.
>
> iirc the thinking was that we need _some_ limit on readahead size so
> the user can't go and do ridiculously large amounts of readahead via
> sys_readahead(). But that doesn't make a lot of sense because the user
> could do the same thing with plain old read().
>
True.
> So for argument's sake I'm thinking we just kill it altogether and
> permit arbitrarily large readahead:
>
> --- a/mm/readahead.c~a
> +++ a/mm/readahead.c
> @@ -238,13 +238,12 @@ int force_page_cache_readahead(struct ad
> }
>
> /*
> - * Given a desired number of PAGE_CACHE_SIZE readahead pages, return a
> - * sensible upper limit.
> + * max_sane_readahead() is disabled. It can later be removed altogether, but
> + * let's keep a skeleton in place for now, in case disabling was the wrong call.
> */
> unsigned long max_sane_readahead(unsigned long nr)
> {
> - return min(nr, (node_page_state(numa_node_id(), NR_INACTIVE_FILE)
> - + node_page_state(numa_node_id(), NR_FREE_PAGES)) / 2);
> + return nr;
> }
>
I had something like below in mind for posting. But it looks
simple now with your patch.
unsigned long max_sane_readahead(unsigned long nr)
{
int nid;
unsigned long free_page = 0;
for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY)
free_page += node_page_state(nid, NR_INACTIVE_FILE)
+ node_page_state(nid, NR_FREE_PAGES);
/*
* Readahead onto remote memory is better than no readahead when local
* numa node does not have memory. We sanitize readahead size depending
* on potential free memory in the whole system.
*/
return min(nr, free_page / (2 * nr_node_ids));
Or if we wanted to avoid iteration on nodes simply returning
something like nr/8 or something like that for remote numa fault cases.
--
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:[~2013-12-05 5:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-03 10:36 [PATCH RFC] mm readahead: Fix the readahead fail in case of empty numa node Raghavendra K T
2013-12-03 22:38 ` Andrew Morton
2013-12-04 8:30 ` Raghavendra K T
2013-12-04 8:41 ` Andrew Morton
2013-12-04 9:08 ` Raghavendra K T
2013-12-04 21:48 ` Andrew Morton
2013-12-05 5:57 ` Raghavendra K T [this message]
2013-12-11 22:49 ` Jan Kara
2013-12-11 23:05 ` Andrew Morton
2013-12-12 11:14 ` Jan Kara
2013-12-14 0:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-12-31 11:07 ` Raghavendra K T
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=52A015E1.50005@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=damien.ramonda@intel.com \
--cc=david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).