lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] Reintroduce zone_reclaim_interval for when zone_reclaim() scans and fails to avoid CPU spinning at 100% on NUMA
Date
> > > > Here it is just recording the jiffies value. The real smarts with the counter
> > > > use time_before() which I assumed could handle jiffie wrap-arounds. Even
> > > > if it doesn't, the consequence is that one scan will occur that could have
> > > > been avoided around the time of the jiffie wraparound. The value will then
> > > > be reset and it will be fine.
> > >
> > > time_before() assume two argument are enough nearly time.
> > > if we use 32bit cpu and HZ=1000, about jiffies wraparound about one month.
> > >
> > > Then,
> > >
> > > 1. zone reclaim failure occur
> > > 2. system works fine for one month
> > > 3. jiffies wrap and time_before() makes mis-calculation.
> > >
> >
> > And the scan occurs uselessly and zone_reclaim_failure gets set again.
> > I believe the one useless scan is not significant enough to warrent dealing
> > with jiffie wraparound.
>
> Thank you for kindful explanation.
> I fully agreed.

Bah, no, not agreed.
simple last failure recording makes following scenario.


1. zone reclaim failure occur. update zone_reclaim_failure.
^
| time_before() return 1, and zone_reclaim() return immediately.
v
2. after 32 second.
^
| time_before() return 0, and zone_reclaim() works normally
v
3. after one month
^
| time_before() return 1, and zone_reclaim() return immediately.
| although recent zone_reclaim() never failed.
v
4. after more one month






\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-09 12:01    [W:0.064 / U:1.740 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site