public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, dgc@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] fix illogical behavior in balance_dirty_pages()
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 13:50:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1174823454.5149.13.camel@lappy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1HVQzy-0007jO-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>

On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 13:34 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > 
> > > Please have a look at this:
> > >   http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/19/220
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > +			if (bdi_nr_reclaimable + bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITEBACK) <=
> > > +			     	bdi_thresh)
> > > +				break;
> > > 
> > 
> > Yes, this will resolve the deadlock as well, where balance_dirty_pages()
> > is currently looping forever with:
> 
> Almost.
> 
> This
> 
> > -		if (nr_reclaimable) {
> > +		if (bdi_nr_reclaimable) {
> >  			writeback_inodes(&wbc);
> 
> still makes it loop forever if bdi_nr_reclaimable == 0, since the exit
> condition is not checked. 
> 
> Shouldn't it break out of the loop if bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITEBACK) <=
> bdi_thresh in this case?

        for (;;) {
                struct writeback_control wbc = {
                        .bdi            = bdi,
                        .sync_mode      = WB_SYNC_NONE,
                        .older_than_this = NULL,
                        .nr_to_write    = write_chunk,
                        .range_cyclic   = 1,
                };

                get_dirty_limits(&background_thresh, &dirty_thresh,
                                &bdi_thresh, bdi);
                bdi_nr_reclaimable = bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_DIRTY) +
                                        bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_UNSTABLE);
(A)             if (bdi_nr_reclaimable + bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITEBACK) <=
                        bdi_thresh)
                                break;

                /* Note: nr_reclaimable denotes nr_dirty + nr_unstable.
                 * Unstable writes are a feature of certain networked
                 * filesystems (i.e. NFS) in which data may have been
                 * written to the server's write cache, but has not yet
                 * been flushed to permanent storage.
                 */
(B)              if (bdi_nr_reclaimable) {
                        writeback_inodes(&wbc);

                        get_dirty_limits(&background_thresh, &dirty_thresh,
                                       &bdi_thresh, bdi);
                        bdi_nr_reclaimable = bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_DIRTY) +
                                                bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_UNSTABLE);
(C)                     if (bdi_nr_reclaimable + bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITEBACK) <=
                                bdi_thresh)
                                break;

                        pages_written += write_chunk - wbc.nr_to_write;
                        if (pages_written >= write_chunk)
                                break;          /* We've done our duty */
                }
                congestion_wait(WRITE, HZ/10);
        }

I'm thinking that if bdi_nr_reclaimable == 0, A reduces to
bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITEBACK) <= bdi_thresh and we're still out of the
loop, no?


  reply	other threads:[~2007-03-25 11:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-03-24 21:55 [patch 1/3] fix illogical behavior in balance_dirty_pages() Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-24 21:57 ` [patch 2/3] remove throttle_vm_writeout() Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-25 23:41   ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26  8:35     ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-24 21:58 ` [patch 3/3] balance dirty pages from loop device Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-25 10:03 ` [patch 1/3] fix illogical behavior in balance_dirty_pages() Peter Zijlstra
2007-03-25 11:12   ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-25 11:34     ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-25 11:50       ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2007-03-25 20:41         ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-25 23:35 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26  8:26   ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-26  9:01     ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26  9:20       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-26  9:32         ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26  9:48           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-26  9:32       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-26 10:08         ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26 13:30           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-03-27  0:30             ` David Chinner
2007-03-27  0:23       ` David Chinner
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-04-03 18:40 Kris Corwin

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=1174823454.5149.13.camel@lappy \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dgc@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    /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