[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100721143118.GA13117@csn.ul.ie>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:31:19 +0100
From: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in
direct reclaim
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 04:28:44PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 02:38:57PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > Here is an updated version. Thanks very much
> >
> > ==== CUT HERE ====
> > vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim
> >
> > When memory is under enough pressure, a process may enter direct
> > reclaim to free pages in the same manner kswapd does. If a dirty page is
> > encountered during the scan, this page is written to backing storage using
> > mapping->writepage. This can result in very deep call stacks, particularly
> > if the target storage or filesystem are complex. It has already been observed
> > on XFS that the stack overflows but the problem is not XFS-specific.
> >
> > This patch prevents direct reclaim writing back filesystem pages by checking
> > if current is kswapd or the page is anonymous before writing back. If the
> > dirty pages cannot be written back, they are placed back on the LRU lists
> > for either background writing by the BDI threads or kswapd. If in direct
> > lumpy reclaim and dirty pages are encountered, the process will stall for
> > the background flusher before trying to reclaim the pages again.
> >
> > As the call-chain for writing anonymous pages is not expected to be deep
> > and they are not cleaned by flusher threads, anonymous pages are still
> > written back in direct reclaim.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
> > Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
>
> Cool!
>
> Except for one last tiny thing...
>
> > @@ -858,7 +872,7 @@ keep:
> >
> > free_page_list(&free_pages);
> >
> > - list_splice(&ret_pages, page_list);
>
> This will lose all retry pages forever, I think.
>
Above this is
while (!list_empty(page_list)) {
...
}
page_list should be empty and keep_locked is putting the pages on ret_pages
already so I think it's ok.
> > + *nr_still_dirty = nr_dirty;
> > count_vm_events(PGACTIVATE, pgactivate);
> > return nr_reclaimed;
> > }
>
> Otherwise,
> Reviewed-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
>
Thanks!
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
--
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