Re: [PATCH RFC] mm: Implement balance_dirty_pages() through waiting for flusher thread
From: Wu Fengguang <hidden>
Date: 2010-06-22 13:33:23
Also in:
linux-fsdevel
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 09:27:35PM +0800, Jan Kara wrote:
On Tue 22-06-10 12:07:27, Wu Fengguang wrote:quoted
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 03:42:39PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:quoted
On Fri 18-06-10 12:21:37, Peter Zijlstra wrote:quoted
On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 20:04 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:quoted
+ if (bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITTEN) >= bdi->wb_written_head) + bdi_wakeup_writers(bdi);For the paranoid amongst us you could make wb_written_head s64 and write the above as: if (bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITTEN) - bdi->wb_written_head > 0) Which, if you assume both are monotonic and wb_written_head is always within 2^63 of the actual bdi_stat() value, should give the same end result and deal with wrap-around. For when we manage to create a device that can write 2^64 pages in our uptime :-)OK, the fix is simple enough so I've changed it, although I'm not paranoic enough ;) (I actually did the math before writing that test).a bit more change :) type: - u64 wb_written_head + s64 wb_written_head resetting: - bdi->wb_written_head = ~(u64)0; + bdi->wb_written_head = 0; setting: bdi->wb_written_head = bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITTEN) + wc->written; + bdi->wb_written_head |= 1; testing: if (bdi->wb_written_head && bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITTEN) - bdi->wb_written_head > 0) This avoids calling into bdi_wakeup_writers() pointlessly when no one is being throttled (which is the normal case).Actually, I've already changed wb_written_head to s64. I kept setting wb_written_head to s64 maximum. That also avoids calling into bdi_wakeup_writers() unnecessarily...
Ah OK, I forgot bdi_stat() calls percpu_counter_read_positive() which is always in range [0, s64 max]. Thanks, Fengguang -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>