• Andrew Morton's avatar
    [PATCH] Give kswapd writeback higher priority than pdflush · e386771c
    Andrew Morton authored
    The `low latency page reclaim' design works by preventing page
    allocators from blocking on request queues (and by preventing them from
    blocking against writeback of individual pages, but that is immaterial
    here).
    
    This has a problem under some situations.  pdflush (or a write(2)
    caller) could be saturating the queue with highmem pages.  This
    prevents anyone from writing back ZONE_NORMAL pages.  We end up doing
    enormous amounts of scenning.
    
    A test case is to mmap(MAP_SHARED) almost all of a 4G machine's memory,
    then kill the mmapping applications.  The machine instantly goes from
    0% of memory dirty to 95% or more.  pdflush kicks in and starts writing
    the least-recently-dirtied pages, which are all highmem.  The queue is
    congested so nobody will write back ZONE_NORMAL pages.  kswapd chews
    50% of the CPU scanning past dirty ZONE_NORMAL pages and page reclaim
    efficiency (pages_reclaimed/pages_scanned) falls to 2%.
    
    So this patch changes the policy for kswapd.  kswapd may use all of a
    request queue, and is prepared to block on request queues.
    
    What will now happen in the above scenario is:
    
    1: The page alloctor scans some pages, fails to reclaim enough
       memory and takes a nap in blk_congetion_wait().
    
    2: kswapd() will scan the ZONE_NORMAL LRU and will start writing
       back pages.  (These pages will be rotated to the tail of the
       inactive list at IO-completion interrupt time).
    
       This writeback will saturate the queue with ZONE_NORMAL pages.
       Conveniently, pdflush will avoid the congested queues.  So we end up
       writing the correct pages.
    
    In this test, kswapd CPU utilisation falls from 50% to 2%, page reclaim
    efficiency rises from 2% to 40% and things are generally a lot happier.
    
    
    The downside is that kswapd may now do a lot less page reclaim,
    increasing page allocation latency, causing more direct reclaim,
    increasing lock contention in the VM, etc.  But I have not been able to
    demonstrate that in testing.
    
    
    The other problem is that there is only one kswapd, and there are lots
    of disks.  That is a generic problem - without being able to co-opt
    user processes we don't have enough threads to keep lots of disks saturated.
    
    One fix for this would be to add an additional "really congested"
    threshold in the request queues, so kswapd can still perform
    nonblocking writeout.  This gives kswapd priority over pdflush while
    allowing kswapd to feed many disk queues.  I doubt if this will be
    called for.
    e386771c
vmscan.c 27.9 KB