On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 03:00:05PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: > On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 09:21:19AM +0800, Yan Zheng wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This will noticeably reduce the fluctuaions of pause time when there are > > > 100+ concurrent dirtiers. > > > > > > The more parallel dirtiers (1 dirtier => 4 dirtiers), the smaller > > > bandwidth each dirtier will share (bdi_bandwidth => bdi_bandwidth/4), > > > the less gap to the dirty limit ((C-A) => (C-B)), the less stable the > > > pause time will be (given the same fluctuation of bdi_dirty). > > > > > > For example, if A drifts to A', its pause time may drift from 5ms to > > > 6ms, while B to B' may drift from 50ms to 90ms. ÂIt's much larger > > > fluctuations in relative ratio as well as absolute time. > > > > > > Fig.1 before patch, gap (C-B) is too low to get smooth pause time > > > > > > throttle_bandwidth_A = bdi_bandwidth .........o > > >                       Â| o <= A' > > >                       Â|  o > > >                       Â|   o > > >                       Â|    o > > >                       Â|     o > > > throttle_bandwidth_B = bdi_bandwidth / 4 .....|...........o > > >                       Â|      | o <= B' > > > ----------------------------------------------+-----------+---o > > >                       ÂA      B  C > > > > > > The solution is to lower the slope of the throttle line accordingly, > > > which makes B stabilize at some point more far away from C. > > > > > > Fig.2 after patch > > > > > > throttle_bandwidth_A = bdi_bandwidth .........o > > >                       Â| o <= A' > > >                       Â|  o > > >                       Â|   o > > >  Âlowered max throttle bandwidth for B ===> *    o > > >                       Â|  *   o > > > throttle_bandwidth_B = bdi_bandwidth / 4 .............*  o > > >                       Â|    |  * o > > > ----------------------------------------------+-------+-------o > > >                       ÂA    B    C > > > > > > Note that C is actually different points for 1-dirty and 4-dirtiers > > > cases, but for easy graphing, we move them together. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Âmm/page-writeback.c |  16 +++++++++++++--- > > > Â1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > --- linux-next.orig/mm/page-writeback.c 2010-12-13 21:46:14.000000000 +0800 > > > +++ linux-next/mm/page-writeback.c   Â2010-12-13 21:46:15.000000000 +0800 > > > @@ -587,6 +587,7 @@ static void balance_dirty_pages(struct a > > >    Âunsigned long background_thresh; > > >    Âunsigned long dirty_thresh; > > >    Âunsigned long bdi_thresh; > > > +    unsigned long task_thresh; > > >    Âunsigned long long bw; > > >    Âunsigned long period; > > >    Âunsigned long pause = 0; > > > @@ -616,7 +617,7 @@ static void balance_dirty_pages(struct a > > >            Âbreak; > > > > > >        Âbdi_thresh = bdi_dirty_limit(bdi, dirty_thresh, nr_dirty); > > > -        bdi_thresh = task_dirty_limit(current, bdi_thresh); > > > +        task_thresh = task_dirty_limit(current, bdi_thresh); > > > > > >        Â/* > > >         * In order to avoid the stacked BDI deadlock we need > > > @@ -638,14 +639,23 @@ static void balance_dirty_pages(struct a > > > > > >        Âbdi_update_bandwidth(bdi, start_time, bdi_dirty, bdi_thresh); > > > > > > -        if (bdi_dirty >= bdi_thresh || nr_dirty > dirty_thresh) { > > > +        if (bdi_dirty >= task_thresh || nr_dirty > dirty_thresh) { > > >            Âpause = MAX_PAUSE; > > >            Âgoto pause; > > >        Â} > > > > > > +        /* > > > +        Â* When bdi_dirty grows closer to bdi_thresh, it indicates more > > > +        Â* concurrent dirtiers. Proportionally lower the max throttle > > > +        Â* bandwidth. This will resist bdi_dirty from approaching to > > > +        Â* close to task_thresh, and help reduce fluctuations of pause > > > +        Â* time when there are lots of dirtiers. > > > +        Â*/ > > >        Âbw = bdi->write_bandwidth; > > > - > > >        Âbw = bw * (bdi_thresh - bdi_dirty); > > > +        do_div(bw, bdi_thresh / BDI_SOFT_DIRTY_LIMIT + 1); > > > + > > > +        bw = bw * (task_thresh - bdi_dirty); > > >        Âdo_div(bw, bdi_thresh / TASK_SOFT_DIRTY_LIMIT + 1); > > > > Maybe changing this line to "do_div(bw, task_thresh / > > TASK_SOFT_DIRTY_LIMIT + 1);" > > is more consistent. > > I'll show you another consistency of "shape" :) > > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/wfg/writeback/slides/light-dirtier-control-line.svg > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/wfg/writeback/slides/heavy-dirtier-control-line.svg > > In the above two figures, the overall control lines for light/heavy > dirtier tasks have exactly the same shape -- it's merely shifted in > the X axis direction. So the current form is actually more simple. Sorry it's not the overall control lines that's simply shifted, but the task control line. bdi control line: > > >        Âbw = bw * (bdi_thresh - bdi_dirty); > > > +        do_div(bw, bdi_thresh / BDI_SOFT_DIRTY_LIMIT + 1); task control line: > > > +        bw = bw * (task_thresh - bdi_dirty); > > >        Âdo_div(bw, bdi_thresh / TASK_SOFT_DIRTY_LIMIT + 1); The use of bdi_thresh in the last line makes sure all task control lines are of the same slope. Thanks, Fengguang -- 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>