Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:24:28AM -0800, Greg Thelen wrote:
>> If called with a mem_cgroup, then throttle_vm_writeout() should
>> query the given cgroup for its dirty memory usage limits.
>>
>> dirty_writeback_pages() is no longer used, so delete it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> include/linux/writeback.h | 2 +-
>> mm/page-writeback.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++---------------
>> mm/vmscan.c | 2 +-
>> 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
>> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
>> index d717fa9..bf85062 100644
>> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
>> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
>> @@ -131,18 +131,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(laptop_mode);
>> static struct prop_descriptor vm_completions;
>> static struct prop_descriptor vm_dirties;
>>
>> -static unsigned long dirty_writeback_pages(void)
>> -{
>> - unsigned long ret;
>> -
>> - ret = mem_cgroup_page_stat(NULL, MEMCG_NR_DIRTY_WRITEBACK_PAGES);
>> - if ((long)ret < 0)
>> - ret = global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS) +
>> - global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK);
>
> There are two bugfixes in this patch. One is getting rid of this
> fallback to global numbers that are compared to memcg limits. The
> other one is that reclaim will now throttle writeout based on the
> cgroup it runs on behalf of, instead of that of the current task.
>
> Both are undocumented and should arguably not even be in the same
> patch...?
I will better document these changes in the commit message and I will
split the change into two patches for clarity.
- sub-patch 1 will change throttle_vm_writeout() to only consider global
usage and limits. This would remove memcg consideration from
throttle_vm_writeout() and thus ensure that only global limits are
compared to global usage.
- sub-patch 2 will introduce memcg consideration consistently into
throttle_vm_writeout(). This will allow throttle_vm_writeout() to
consider memcg usage and limits, but they will uniformly applied.
memcg usage will not be compared to global limits.
>> @@ -703,12 +691,25 @@ void balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited_nr(struct address_space *mapping,
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited_nr);
>>
>> -void throttle_vm_writeout(gfp_t gfp_mask)
>> +/*
>> + * Throttle the current task if it is near dirty memory usage limits.
>> + * If @mem_cgroup is NULL or the root_cgroup, then use global dirty memory
>> + * information; otherwise use the per-memcg dirty limits.
>> + */
>> +void throttle_vm_writeout(gfp_t gfp_mask, struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup)
>> {
>> struct dirty_info dirty_info;
>> + unsigned long nr_writeback;
>>
>> for ( ; ; ) {
>> - global_dirty_info(&dirty_info);
>> + if (!mem_cgroup || !memcg_dirty_info(mem_cgroup, &dirty_info)) {
>> + global_dirty_info(&dirty_info);
>> + nr_writeback = global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS) +
>> + global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK);
>> + } else {
>> + nr_writeback = mem_cgroup_page_stat(
>> + mem_cgroup, MEMCG_NR_DIRTY_WRITEBACK_PAGES);
>> + }
>
> Odd branch ordering, but I may be OCDing again.
>
> if (mem_cgroup && memcg_dirty_info())
> do_mem_cgroup_stuff()
> else
> do_global_stuff()
>
> would be more natural, IMO.
I agree. I will resubmit this series with your improved branch ordering.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>