[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100415062055.GQ2493@dastard>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:20:55 +1000
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: disallow direct reclaim page writeback
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 01:09:01PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Hi
>
> > How about this? For now, we stop direct reclaim from doing writeback
> > only on order zero allocations, but allow it for higher order
> > allocations. That will prevent the majority of situations where
> > direct reclaim blows the stack and interferes with background
> > writeout, but won't cause lumpy reclaim to change behaviour.
> > This reduces the scope of impact and hence testing and validation
> > the needs to be done.
>
> Tend to agree. but I would proposed slightly different algorithm for
> avoind incorrect oom.
>
> for high order allocation
> allow to use lumpy reclaim and pageout() for both kswapd and direct reclaim
SO same as current.
> for low order allocation
> - kswapd: always delegate io to flusher thread
> - direct reclaim: delegate io to flusher thread only if vm pressure is low
IMO, this really doesn't fix either of the problems - the bad IO
patterns nor the stack usage. All it will take is a bit more memory
pressure to trigger stack and IO problems, and the user reporting the
problems is generating an awful lot of memory pressure...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists