[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YL63yf3oIuLDlxNF@carbon.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 17:20:25 -0700
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To: Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>
CC: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@...ck.org>, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>, <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 6/6] writeback, cgroup: release dying cgwbs by
switching attached inodes
On Sat, Jun 05, 2021 at 09:34:41PM +0000, Dennis Zhou wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 06:31:59PM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > Asynchronously try to release dying cgwbs by switching attached inodes
> > to the bdi's wb. It helps to get rid of per-cgroup writeback
> > structures themselves and of pinned memory and block cgroups, which
> > are significantly larger structures (mostly due to large per-cpu
> > statistics data). This prevents memory waste and helps to avoid
> > different scalability problems caused by large piles of dying cgroups.
> >
> > Reuse the existing mechanism of inode switching used for foreign inode
> > detection. To speed things up batch up to 115 inode switching in a
> > single operation (the maximum number is selected so that the resulting
> > struct inode_switch_wbs_context can fit into 1024 bytes). Because
> > every switching consists of two steps divided by an RCU grace period,
> > it would be too slow without batching. Please note that the whole
> > batch counts as a single operation (when increasing/decreasing
> > isw_nr_in_flight). This allows to keep umounting working (flush the
> > switching queue), however prevents cleanups from consuming the whole
> > switching quota and effectively blocking the frn switching.
> >
> > A cgwb cleanup operation can fail due to different reasons (e.g. not
> > enough memory, the cgwb has an in-flight/pending io, an attached inode
> > in a wrong state, etc). In this case the next scheduled cleanup will
> > make a new attempt. An attempt is made each time a new cgwb is offlined
> > (in other words a memcg and/or a blkcg is deleted by a user). In the
> > future an additional attempt scheduled by a timer can be implemented.
>
> I've been thinking about this for a little while and the only thing I'm
> not super thrilled by is that the subsequent cleanup work trigger isn't
> due to forward progress.
>
> As future work, we could tag the inodes to switch when writeback
> completes instead of using a timer. This would be nice because then we
> only have to make a single (successful) pass switching the inodes we can
> and then mark the others to switch. Once a cgwb is killed no one else
> can attach to it so we should be good there.
>
> I don't think this is a blocker or even necessary, I just wanted to put
> it out there as possible future direction instead of a timer.
Yeah, I agree that it's a good direction to explore. It will be likely
more intrusive and will require new inode flag. So I'd leave it for further
improvements.
Thank you for reviewing the series!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists