Hi Michael,
// sorry for the delay...
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 06:02:55PM -0800, Michael Rubin wrote:
> From: Michael Rubin <[email protected]>
>
> Fixing a bug where writing to large files while concurrently writing to
> smaller ones creates a situation where writeback cannot keep up with the
> traffic and memory baloons until the we hit the threshold watermark. This
> can result in surprising latency spikes when syncing. This latency
> can take minutes on large memory systems. Upon request I can provide
> a test to reproduce this situation.
>
> The only concern I have is that this makes the wb_kupdate slightly more
> agressive. I am not sure it is enough to cause any problems. I think
> there is enough checks to throttle the background activity.
>
> Feng also the one line change that you recommended here
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=119629655402153&w=2 had no effect.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Rubin <[email protected]>
> ---
> Index: 2624rc3_feng/fs/fs-writeback.c
> ===================================================================
> --- 2624rc3_feng.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c 2007-11-29 14:44:24.000000000 -0800
> +++ 2624rc3_feng/fs/fs-writeback.c 2007-12-10 17:21:45.000000000 -0800
> @@ -408,8 +408,7 @@ sync_sb_inodes(struct super_block *sb, s
> {
> const unsigned long start = jiffies; /* livelock avoidance */
>
> - if (!wbc->for_kupdate || list_empty(&sb->s_io))
> - queue_io(sb, wbc->older_than_this);
> + queue_io(sb, wbc->older_than_this);
Basically it's a workaround by changing the service priority.
Assume A to be the large file and B,C,D,E,... to be the small files.
- old behavior:
sync 4MB of A; sync B,C; congestion_wait();
sync 4MB of A; sync D,E; congestion_wait();
sync 4MB of A; sync F,G; congestion_wait();
...
- new behavior:
sync 4MB of A;
sync 4MB of A;
sync 4MB of A;
sync 4MB of A;
sync 4MB of A;
... // repeat until A is clean
sync B,C,D,E,F,G;
So the bug is gone, but now A could possibly starve other files :-(
> while (!list_empty(&sb->s_io)) {
> struct inode *inode = list_entry(sb->s_io.prev,
> Index: 2624rc3_feng/mm/page-writeback.c
> ===================================================================
> --- 2624rc3_feng.orig/mm/page-writeback.c 2007-11-16 21:16:36.000000000 -0800
> +++ 2624rc3_feng/mm/page-writeback.c 2007-12-10 17:37:17.000000000 -0800
> @@ -638,7 +638,7 @@ static void wb_kupdate(unsigned long arg
> wbc.nr_to_write = MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES;
> writeback_inodes(&wbc);
> if (wbc.nr_to_write > 0) {
> - if (wbc.encountered_congestion || wbc.more_io)
> + if (wbc.encountered_congestion)
No, this could make wb_kupdate() abort even when there are more data
to be synced. That will make David Chinner unhappy ;-)
> congestion_wait(WRITE, HZ/10);
> else
> break; /* All the old data is written */
Just a minute, I'll propose a way out of this bug :-)
Fengguang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
