[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110421164154.GC4476@quack.suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 18:41:54 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
Itaru Kitayama <kitayama@...bb4u.ne.jp>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] writeback: try more writeback as long as something
was written
On Thu 21-04-11 14:05:56, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:39:40PM +0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:33:25AM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > I collected the writeback_single_inode() traces (patch attached for
> > > your reference) each for several test runs, and find much more
> > > I_DIRTY_PAGES after patchset. Dave, do you know why there are so many
> > > I_DIRTY_PAGES (or radix tag) remained after the XFS ->writepages() call,
> > > even for small files?
> >
> > What is your defintion of a small file? As soon as it has multiple
> > extents or holes there's absolutely no way to clean it with a single
> > writepage call.
>
> It's writing a kernel source tree to XFS. You can find in the below
> trace that it often leaves more dirty pages behind (indicated by the
> I_DIRTY_PAGES flag) after writing as less as 1 page (indicated by the
> wrote=1 field).
As Dave said, it's probably just a race since XFS redirties the inode on
IO completion. So I think the inodes are just small so they have only a few
dirty pages so you don't have much to write and they are written and
redirtied before you check the I_DIRTY flags. You could use radix tree
dirty tag to verify whether there are really dirty pages or not...
BTW a quick check of kernel tree shows the following distribution of
sizes (in KB):
Count KB Cumulative Percent
257 0 0.9%
13309 4 45%
5553 8 63%
2997 12 73%
1879 16 80%
1275 20 83%
987 24 87%
685 28 89%
540 32 91%
387 36 ...
309 40
264 44
249 48
170 52
143 56
144 60
132 64
100 68
...
Total 30155
And the distribution of your 'wrote=xxx' roughly corresponds to this...
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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