linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Add memalloc_nowait_{save,restore}
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 10:28:06 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zrv6Fts73FECScyd@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240812090525.80299-2-laoar.shao@gmail.com>

On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 05:05:24PM +0800, Yafang Shao wrote:
> The PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM flag was introduced in commit eab0af905bfc
> ("mm: introduce PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM, PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN"). To complement
> this, let's add two helper functions, memalloc_nowait_{save,restore}, which
> will be useful in scenarios where we want to avoid waiting for memory
> reclamation.

Readahead already uses this context:

static inline gfp_t readahead_gfp_mask(struct address_space *x)
{
        return mapping_gfp_mask(x) | __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_NOWARN;
}

and __GFP_NORETRY means minimal direct reclaim should be performed.
Most filesystems already have GFP_NOFS context from
mapping_gfp_mask(), so how much difference does completely avoiding
direct reclaim actually make under memory pressure?

i.e. doing some direct reclaim without blocking when under memory
pressure might actually give better performance than skipping direct
reclaim and aborting readahead altogether....

This really, really needs some numbers (both throughput and IO
latency histograms) to go with it because we have no evidence either
way to determine what is the best approach here.

-Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-08-14  0:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-12  9:05 [PATCH 0/2] mm: Add readahead support for IOCB_NOWAIT Yafang Shao
2024-08-12  9:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: Add memalloc_nowait_{save,restore} Yafang Shao
2024-08-12 11:37   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-08-12 12:59     ` Yafang Shao
2024-08-12 13:21       ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-08-13  2:09         ` Yafang Shao
2024-08-14  5:27           ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-08-14  7:33             ` Yafang Shao
2024-09-01 20:24               ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-09-01 20:42                 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-08-14  7:42       ` Michal Hocko
2024-08-14  8:12         ` Yafang Shao
2024-08-14 12:43           ` Michal Hocko
2024-08-15  3:26             ` Yafang Shao
2024-08-15  6:22               ` Michal Hocko
2024-08-15  6:32                 ` Yafang Shao
2024-08-15  6:51                   ` Michal Hocko
2024-08-16  8:17                     ` [PATCH] mm: document risk of PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM Michal Hocko
2024-08-16  8:22                       ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-08-16  8:54                         ` Michal Hocko
2024-08-16 14:26                           ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-08-16 15:57                             ` Michal Hocko
2024-08-21  7:30                           ` Michal Hocko
2024-08-21 11:44                           ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-08-21 12:37                             ` Michal Hocko
2024-08-22  9:09                               ` Christian Brauner
2024-08-17  2:29                       ` Yafang Shao
2024-08-19  7:57                         ` Michal Hocko
2024-08-12 16:48     ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: Add memalloc_nowait_{save,restore} Kent Overstreet
2024-08-14  5:24       ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-08-14  0:28   ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2024-08-14  2:19     ` Yafang Shao
2024-08-14  5:42       ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-14  7:32         ` Yafang Shao
2024-08-15  2:54           ` Dave Chinner
2024-08-15  3:38             ` Yafang Shao
2024-08-12  9:05 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: allow read-ahead with IOCB_NOWAIT set Yafang Shao

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=Zrv6Fts73FECScyd@dread.disaster.area \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
    --cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.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).