[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130410164455.a3cbcbdf86bc72455c22f420@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:44:55 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: dcache: cond_resched in shrink_dentry_list
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 17:37:20 -0700 Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com> wrote:
> > Call cond_resched() in shrink_dcache_parent() to maintain
> > interactivity.
> >
> > Before this patch:
> >
> > void shrink_dcache_parent(struct dentry * parent)
> > {
> > while ((found = select_parent(parent, &dispose)) != 0)
> > shrink_dentry_list(&dispose);
> > }
> >
> > select_parent() populates the dispose list with dentries which
> > shrink_dentry_list() then deletes. select_parent() carefully uses
> > need_resched() to avoid doing too much work at once. But neither
> > shrink_dcache_parent() nor its called functions call cond_resched().
> > So once need_resched() is set select_parent() will return single
> > dentry dispose list which is then deleted by shrink_dentry_list().
> > This is inefficient when there are a lot of dentry to process. This
> > can cause softlockup and hurts interactivity on non preemptable
> > kernels.
> >
> > This change adds cond_resched() in shrink_dcache_parent(). The
> > benefit of this is that need_resched() is quickly cleared so that
> > future calls to select_parent() are able to efficiently return a big
> > batch of dentry.
> >
> > These additional cond_resched() do not seem to impact performance, at
> > least for the workload below.
> >
> > Here is a program which can cause soft lockup on a if other system
> > activity sets need_resched().
I was unable to guess what word was missing from "on a if other" ;)
> Should this change go through Al's or Andrew's branch?
I'll fight him for it.
Softlockups are fairly serious, so I'll put a cc:stable in there. Or
were the changes which triggered this problem added after 3.9?
--
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