Re: [PATCH 14/26] mm: back off direct reclaim on excessive shrinker deferral

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 09:21:05AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 02:21:12PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > +			if ((reclaim_state->deferred_objects >
> > +					sc->nr_scanned - nr_scanned) &&
> > +			    (reclaim_state->deferred_objects >
> > +					reclaim_state->scanned_objects)) {
> > +				wait_iff_congested(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/50);
> 
> Unfortunately, Jens broke wait_iff_congested() recently, and doesn't plan
> to fix it.  We need to come up with another way to estimate congestion.

I know, all the ways the block layer is broken are right there in
the cover letter at the end of the v1 patchset description from
more than 2 months ago.

When people work out how to fix congestion detection and backoff
again, this can be updated at the same time.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux