on 11/19/2024 8:29 PM, Jim Zhao wrote: > Thanks, Jan, I just sent patch v2, could you please review it ? > > And I found the debug info in the bdi stats. > The BdiDirtyThresh value may be greater than DirtyThresh, and after applying this patch, the value of BdiDirtyThresh could become even larger. > > without patch: > --- > root@ubuntu:/sys/kernel/debug/bdi/8:0# cat stats > BdiWriteback: 0 kB > BdiReclaimable: 96 kB > BdiDirtyThresh: 1346824 kB > DirtyThresh: 673412 kB > BackgroundThresh: 336292 kB > BdiDirtied: 19872 kB > BdiWritten: 19776 kB > BdiWriteBandwidth: 0 kBps > b_dirty: 0 > b_io: 0 > b_more_io: 0 > b_dirty_time: 0 > bdi_list: 1 > state: 1 > > with patch: > --- > root@ubuntu:/sys/kernel/debug/bdi/8:0# cat stats > BdiWriteback: 96 kB > BdiReclaimable: 192 kB > BdiDirtyThresh: 3090736 kB > DirtyThresh: 650716 kB > BackgroundThresh: 324960 kB > BdiDirtied: 472512 kB > BdiWritten: 470592 kB > BdiWriteBandwidth: 106268 kBps > b_dirty: 2 > b_io: 0 > b_more_io: 0 > b_dirty_time: 0 > bdi_list: 1 > state: 1 > > > @kemeng, is this a normal behavior or an issue ? Hello, this is not a normal behavior, could you aslo send the content in wb_stats and configuired bdi_min_ratio. I think the improper use of bdi_min_ratio may cause the issue. Thanks, Kemeng > > Thanks, > Jim Zhao > > >> With the strictlimit flag, wb_thresh acts as a hard limit in >> balance_dirty_pages() and wb_position_ratio(). When device write >> operations are inactive, wb_thresh can drop to 0, causing writes to be >> blocked. The issue occasionally occurs in fuse fs, particularly with >> network backends, the write thread is blocked frequently during a period. >> To address it, this patch raises the minimum wb_thresh to a controllable >> level, similar to the non-strictlimit case. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jim Zhao <jimzhao.ai@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Changes in v2: >> 1. Consolidate all wb_thresh bumping logic in __wb_calc_thresh for consistency; >> 2. Replace the limit variable with thresh for calculating the bump value, >> as __wb_calc_thresh is also used to calculate the background threshold; >> 3. Add domain_dirty_avail in wb_calc_thresh to get dtc->dirty. >> --- >> mm/page-writeback.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- >> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c >> index e5a9eb795f99..8b13bcb42de3 100644 >> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c >> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c >> @@ -917,7 +917,9 @@ static unsigned long __wb_calc_thresh(struct dirty_throttle_control *dtc, >> unsigned long thresh) >> { >> struct wb_domain *dom = dtc_dom(dtc); >> + struct bdi_writeback *wb = dtc->wb; >> u64 wb_thresh; >> + u64 wb_max_thresh; >> unsigned long numerator, denominator; >> unsigned long wb_min_ratio, wb_max_ratio; >> >> @@ -931,11 +933,27 @@ static unsigned long __wb_calc_thresh(struct dirty_throttle_control *dtc, >> wb_thresh *= numerator; >> wb_thresh = div64_ul(wb_thresh, denominator); >> >> - wb_min_max_ratio(dtc->wb, &wb_min_ratio, &wb_max_ratio); >> + wb_min_max_ratio(wb, &wb_min_ratio, &wb_max_ratio); >> >> wb_thresh += (thresh * wb_min_ratio) / (100 * BDI_RATIO_SCALE); >> - if (wb_thresh > (thresh * wb_max_ratio) / (100 * BDI_RATIO_SCALE)) >> - wb_thresh = thresh * wb_max_ratio / (100 * BDI_RATIO_SCALE); >> + >> + /* >> + * It's very possible that wb_thresh is close to 0 not because the >> + * device is slow, but that it has remained inactive for long time. >> + * Honour such devices a reasonable good (hopefully IO efficient) >> + * threshold, so that the occasional writes won't be blocked and active >> + * writes can rampup the threshold quickly. >> + */ >> + if (thresh > dtc->dirty) { >> + if (unlikely(wb->bdi->capabilities & BDI_CAP_STRICTLIMIT)) >> + wb_thresh = max(wb_thresh, (thresh - dtc->dirty) / 100); >> + else >> + wb_thresh = max(wb_thresh, (thresh - dtc->dirty) / 8); >> + } >> + >> + wb_max_thresh = thresh * wb_max_ratio / (100 * BDI_RATIO_SCALE); >> + if (wb_thresh > wb_max_thresh) >> + wb_thresh = wb_max_thresh; >> >> return wb_thresh; >> } >> @@ -944,6 +962,7 @@ unsigned long wb_calc_thresh(struct bdi_writeback *wb, unsigned long thresh) >> { >> struct dirty_throttle_control gdtc = { GDTC_INIT(wb) }; >> >> + domain_dirty_avail(&gdtc, true); >> return __wb_calc_thresh(&gdtc, thresh); >> } >> >> @@ -1120,12 +1139,6 @@ static void wb_position_ratio(struct dirty_throttle_control *dtc) >> if (unlikely(wb->bdi->capabilities & BDI_CAP_STRICTLIMIT)) { >> long long wb_pos_ratio; >> >> - if (dtc->wb_dirty < 8) { >> - dtc->pos_ratio = min_t(long long, pos_ratio * 2, >> - 2 << RATELIMIT_CALC_SHIFT); >> - return; >> - } >> - >> if (dtc->wb_dirty >= wb_thresh) >> return; >> >> @@ -1196,14 +1209,6 @@ static void wb_position_ratio(struct dirty_throttle_control *dtc) >> */ >> if (unlikely(wb_thresh > dtc->thresh)) >> wb_thresh = dtc->thresh; >> - /* >> - * It's very possible that wb_thresh is close to 0 not because the >> - * device is slow, but that it has remained inactive for long time. >> - * Honour such devices a reasonable good (hopefully IO efficient) >> - * threshold, so that the occasional writes won't be blocked and active >> - * writes can rampup the threshold quickly. >> - */ >> - wb_thresh = max(wb_thresh, (limit - dtc->dirty) / 8); >> /* >> * scale global setpoint to wb's: >> * wb_setpoint = setpoint * wb_thresh / thresh >> @@ -1459,17 +1464,10 @@ static void wb_update_dirty_ratelimit(struct dirty_throttle_control *dtc, >> * balanced_dirty_ratelimit = task_ratelimit * write_bw / dirty_rate). >> * Hence, to calculate "step" properly, we have to use wb_dirty as >> * "dirty" and wb_setpoint as "setpoint". >> - * >> - * We rampup dirty_ratelimit forcibly if wb_dirty is low because >> - * it's possible that wb_thresh is close to zero due to inactivity >> - * of backing device. >> */ >> if (unlikely(wb->bdi->capabilities & BDI_CAP_STRICTLIMIT)) { >> dirty = dtc->wb_dirty; >> - if (dtc->wb_dirty < 8) >> - setpoint = dtc->wb_dirty + 1; >> - else >> - setpoint = (dtc->wb_thresh + dtc->wb_bg_thresh) / 2; >> + setpoint = (dtc->wb_thresh + dtc->wb_bg_thresh) / 2; >> } >> >> if (dirty < setpoint) { >> -- >> 2.20.1 >