lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Likley stupid question on "throttle_vm_writeout"
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 04:26:33PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 07:15 -0800, Martin Knoblauch wrote:
> > Hi, (please CC me on replies)
> >
> > I have a likely stupid question on the function "throttle_vm_writeout". Looking at the code I find:
> >
> > if (global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS) +
> > global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK) <= dirty_thresh)
> > break;
> > congestion_wait(WRITE, HZ/10);
> >
> > Shouldn't the NR_FILE_DIRTY pages be considered as well?
>
> Ha, you just trod onto a piece of ugly I'd totally forgotten about ;-)
>
> The intent of throttle_vm_writeout() is to limit the total pages in
> writeout and to wait for them to go-away.

Like this:

vmscan fast => large NR_WRITEBACK => throttle vmscan based on it

> Everybody hates the function, nobody managed to actually come up with
> anything better.

btw, here is another reason to limit NR_WRITEBACK: I saw many
throttle_vm_writeout() waits if there is no wait queue to limit
NR_WRITEBACK (eg. NFS). In that case the (steadily) big NR_WRITEBACK
is _not_ caused by fast vmscan..

Thanks,
Fengguang


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-10 03:11    [W:0.740 / U:0.368 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site