On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 14:09:54 +0800 Jim Zhao <jimzhao.ai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 18:00:32 +0800 Jim Zhao <jimzhao.ai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > 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. > > > Please tell us more about the userspace-visible effects of this. It > > *sounds* like a serious (but occasional) problem, but that is unclear. > > > And, very much relatedly, do you feel this fix is needed in earlier > > (-stable) kernels? > > The problem exists in two scenarios: > 1. FUSE Write Transition from Inactive to Active > > sometimes, active writes require several pauses to ramp up to the appropriate wb_thresh. > As shown in the trace below, both bdi_setpoint and task_ratelimit are 0, means wb_thresh is 0. > The dd process pauses multiple times before reaching a normal state. > > dd-1206590 [003] .... 62988.324049: balance_dirty_pages: bdi 0:51: limit=295073 setpoint=259360 dirty=454 bdi_setpoint=0 bdi_dirty=32 dirty_ratelimit=18716 task_ratelimit=0 dirtied=32 dirtied_pause=32 paused=0 pause=4 period=4 think=0 cgroup_ino=1 > dd-1206590 [003] .... 62988.332063: balance_dirty_pages: bdi 0:51: limit=295073 setpoint=259453 dirty=454 bdi_setpoint=0 bdi_dirty=33 dirty_ratelimit=18716 task_ratelimit=0 dirtied=1 dirtied_pause=0 paused=0 pause=4 period=4 think=4 cgroup_ino=1 > dd-1206590 [003] .... 62988.340064: balance_dirty_pages: bdi 0:51: limit=295073 setpoint=259526 dirty=454 bdi_setpoint=0 bdi_dirty=34 dirty_ratelimit=18716 task_ratelimit=0 dirtied=1 dirtied_pause=0 paused=0 pause=4 period=4 think=4 cgroup_ino=1 > dd-1206590 [003] .... 62988.348061: balance_dirty_pages: bdi 0:51: limit=295073 setpoint=259531 dirty=489 bdi_setpoint=0 bdi_dirty=35 dirty_ratelimit=18716 task_ratelimit=0 dirtied=1 dirtied_pause=0 paused=0 pause=4 period=4 think=4 cgroup_ino=1 > dd-1206590 [003] .... 62988.356063: balance_dirty_pages: bdi 0:51: limit=295073 setpoint=259531 dirty=490 bdi_setpoint=0 bdi_dirty=36 dirty_ratelimit=18716 task_ratelimit=0 dirtied=1 dirtied_pause=0 paused=0 pause=4 period=4 think=4 cgroup_ino=1 > ... > > 2. FUSE with Unstable Network Backends and Occasional Writes > Not easy to reproduce, but when it occurs in this scenario, > it causes the write thread to experience more pauses and longer durations. Thanks, but it's still unclear how this impacts our users. How lenghty are these pauses?
