From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p7INtAR3233768 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 18:55:10 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id F0FFB1BBA0CC for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:55:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [140.211.169.13]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id jggh8QOFe1o63DJB for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:55:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:54:20 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Reduce filesystem writeback from page reclaim v3 Message-Id: <20110818165420.0a7aabb5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1312973240-32576-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> References: <1312973240-32576-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Mel Gorman Cc: Rik van Riel , Jan Kara , LKML , XFS , Christoph Hellwig , Linux-MM , Minchan Kim , Wu Fengguang , Johannes Weiner On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 11:47:13 +0100 Mel Gorman wrote: > The new problem is that > reclaim has very little control over how long before a page in a > particular zone or container is cleaned which is discussed later. Confused - where was this discussed? Please tell us more about this problem and how it was addressed. Another (and somewhat interrelated) potential problem I see with this work is that it throws a big dependency onto kswapd. If kswapd gets stuck somewhere for extended periods, there's nothing there to perform direct writeback. This has happened in the past in weird situations such as kswpad getting blocked on ext3 journal commits which are themselves stuck for ages behind lots of writeout which itself is stuck behind lots of reads. That's an advantage of direct reclaim: more threads available. How forcefully has this stuff been tested with multiple disks per kswapd? Where one disk is overloaded-ext3-on-usb-stick? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs