| Message ID | 163157838437.13293.14244628630141187199.stgit@noble.brown (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | congestion_wait() and GFP_NOFAIL | expand |
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 10:13:04AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > Indefinite loops waiting for memory allocation are discouraged by > documentation in gfp.h which says the use of __GFP_NOFAIL that it > > is definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless > loop around allocator. > > Such loops that use congestion_wait() are particularly unwise as > congestion_wait() is indistinguishable from > schedule_timeout_uninterruptible() in practice - and should be > deprecated. > > So this patch changes the two loops in ext4_ext_truncate() to use > __GFP_NOFAIL instead of looping. > > As the allocation is multiple layers deeper in the call stack, this > requires passing the EXT4_EX_NOFAIL flag down and handling it in various > places. > > Of particular interest is the ext4_journal_start family of calls which > can now have EXT4_EX_NOFAIL 'or'ed in to the 'type'. This could be seen > as a blurring of types. However 'type' is 8 bits, and EXT4_EX_NOFAIL is > a high bit, so it is safe in practice. > > jbd2__journal_start() is enhanced so that the gfp_t flags passed are > used for *all* allocations. > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> I'm not a fan. GFP_NOFAIL allows access to emergency reserves increasing the risk of a livelock if memory is completely depleted where as some callers can afford to wait. The key event should be reclaim making progress. The hack below is intended to vaguely demonstrate how blocking can be based on reclaim making progress instead of "congestion" but has not even been booted. A more complete overhaul may involve introducing reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, long timeout, nodemask_t *nodemask) and reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, long timeout) and converting congestion_wait and wait_iff_congestion to calling reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask which waits on the first usable node and then audit every single congestion_wait() user to see which API they should call. Further work would be to establish whether the page allocator should call reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask() if direct reclaim is not making progress or whether that should be in vmscan.c. Conceivably, GFP_NOFAIL could then soften its access to emergency reserves but I haven't given it much thought. Yes it's significant work, but it would be a better than letting __GFP_NOFAIL propagate further and kicking us down the road. This hack is terrible, it's not the right way to do it, it's just to illustrate the idea of "waiting on memory should be based on reclaim making progress and not the state of storage" is not impossible. --8<-- diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h index 5c0318509f9e..5ed81c5746ec 100644 --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h @@ -832,6 +832,7 @@ typedef struct pglist_data { unsigned long node_spanned_pages; /* total size of physical page range, including holes */ int node_id; + wait_queue_head_t reclaim_wait; wait_queue_head_t kswapd_wait; wait_queue_head_t pfmemalloc_wait; struct task_struct *kswapd; /* Protected by diff --git a/mm/backing-dev.c b/mm/backing-dev.c index 6122c78ce914..21a9cd693d12 100644 --- a/mm/backing-dev.c +++ b/mm/backing-dev.c @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ #include <linux/module.h> #include <linux/writeback.h> #include <linux/device.h> +#include <linux/swap.h> #include <trace/events/writeback.h> struct backing_dev_info noop_backing_dev_info; @@ -1013,25 +1014,41 @@ void set_bdi_congested(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, int sync) EXPORT_SYMBOL(set_bdi_congested); /** - * congestion_wait - wait for a backing_dev to become uncongested - * @sync: SYNC or ASYNC IO - * @timeout: timeout in jiffies + * congestion_wait - the docs are now worthless but avoiding a rename * - * Waits for up to @timeout jiffies for a backing_dev (any backing_dev) to exit - * write congestion. If no backing_devs are congested then just wait for the - * next write to be completed. + * New thing -- wait for a timeout or reclaim to make progress */ long congestion_wait(int sync, long timeout) { + pg_data_t *pgdat; long ret; unsigned long start = jiffies; DEFINE_WAIT(wait); - wait_queue_head_t *wqh = &congestion_wqh[sync]; + wait_queue_head_t *wqh; - prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); - ret = io_schedule_timeout(timeout); + /* Never let kswapd sleep on itself */ + if (current_is_kswapd()) + goto trace; + + /* + * Dangerous, local memory may be forbidden by cpuset or policies, + * use first eligible zone in zonelists node instead + */ + preempt_disable(); + pgdat = NODE_DATA(smp_processor_id()); + preempt_enable(); + wqh = &pgdat->reclaim_wait; + + /* + * Should probably check watermark of suitable zones here + * in case this is spuriously called + */ + + prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); + ret = schedule_timeout(timeout); finish_wait(wqh, &wait); +trace: trace_writeback_congestion_wait(jiffies_to_usecs(timeout), jiffies_to_usecs(jiffies - start)); diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c index 5b09e71c9ce7..4b87b73d1264 100644 --- a/mm/page_alloc.c +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c @@ -7418,6 +7418,7 @@ static void __meminit pgdat_init_internals(struct pglist_data *pgdat) pgdat_init_split_queue(pgdat); pgdat_init_kcompactd(pgdat); + init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->reclaim_wait); init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->kswapd_wait); init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait); diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c index 158c9c93d03c..0ac2cf6be5e3 100644 --- a/mm/vmscan.c +++ b/mm/vmscan.c @@ -2888,6 +2888,8 @@ static void shrink_node_memcgs(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) } while ((memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, memcg, NULL))); } +static bool pgdat_balanced(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int highest_zoneidx); + static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) { struct reclaim_state *reclaim_state = current->reclaim_state; @@ -3070,6 +3072,18 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) sc)) goto again; + /* + * Might be race-prone, more appropriate to do this when exiting + * direct reclaim and when kswapd finds that pgdat is balanced. + * May also be appropriate to update pgdat_balanced to take + * a watermark level and wakeup when min watermarks are ok + * instead of waiting for the high watermark + */ + if (waitqueue_active(&pgdat->reclaim_wait) && + pgdat_balanced(pgdat, 0, ZONE_MOVABLE)) { + wake_up_interruptible(&pgdat->reclaim_wait); + } + /* * Kswapd gives up on balancing particular nodes after too * many failures to reclaim anything from them and goes to
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 10:13:04AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > Indefinite loops waiting for memory allocation are discouraged by > > documentation in gfp.h which says the use of __GFP_NOFAIL that it > > > > is definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless > > loop around allocator. > > > > Such loops that use congestion_wait() are particularly unwise as > > congestion_wait() is indistinguishable from > > schedule_timeout_uninterruptible() in practice - and should be > > deprecated. > > > > So this patch changes the two loops in ext4_ext_truncate() to use > > __GFP_NOFAIL instead of looping. > > > > As the allocation is multiple layers deeper in the call stack, this > > requires passing the EXT4_EX_NOFAIL flag down and handling it in various > > places. > > > > Of particular interest is the ext4_journal_start family of calls which > > can now have EXT4_EX_NOFAIL 'or'ed in to the 'type'. This could be seen > > as a blurring of types. However 'type' is 8 bits, and EXT4_EX_NOFAIL is > > a high bit, so it is safe in practice. > > > > jbd2__journal_start() is enhanced so that the gfp_t flags passed are > > used for *all* allocations. > > > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> > > I'm not a fan. GFP_NOFAIL allows access to emergency reserves increasing > the risk of a livelock if memory is completely depleted where as some > callers can afford to wait. Maybe we should wind back and focus on the documentation patches. As quoted above, mm.h says: > > is definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless > > loop around allocator. but you seem to be saying that is wrong. I'd certainly like to get the documentation right before changing any code. Why does __GFP_NOFAIL access the reserves? Why not require that the relevant "Try harder" flag (__GFP_ATOMIC or __GFP_MEMALLOC) be included with __GFP_NOFAIL if that is justified? There are over 100 __GFP_NOFAIL allocation sites. I don't feel like reviewing them all and seeing if any really need a try-harder flag. Can we rename __GFP_NOFAIL to __GFP_NEVERFAIL and then #define __GFP_NOFAIL (__GFP_NEVERFAIL | __GFP_ATOMIC) and encourage the use of __GFP_NEVERFAIL in future? When __GFP_NOFAIL loops, it calls congestion_wait() internally. That certainly needs to be fixed and the ideas you present below are certainly worth considering when trying to understand how to address that. I'd rather fix it once there in page_alloc.c rather then export a waiting API like congestion_wait(). That would provide more flexibility. e.g. a newly freed page could be handed directly back to the waiter. Thanks, NeilBrown > > The key event should be reclaim making progress. The hack below is > intended to vaguely demonstrate how blocking can be based on reclaim > making progress instead of "congestion" but has not even been booted. A > more complete overhaul may involve introducing > reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, long timeout, nodemask_t *nodemask) > and > reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, long timeout) > and converting congestion_wait and wait_iff_congestion to calling > reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask which waits on the first usable node > and then audit every single congestion_wait() user to see which API > they should call. Further work would be to establish whether the page allocator should > call reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask() if direct reclaim is not making > progress or whether that should be in vmscan.c. Conceivably, GFP_NOFAIL > could then soften its access to emergency reserves but I haven't given > it much thought. > > Yes it's significant work, but it would be a better than letting > __GFP_NOFAIL propagate further and kicking us down the road. > > This hack is terrible, it's not the right way to do it, it's just to > illustrate the idea of "waiting on memory should be based on reclaim > making progress and not the state of storage" is not impossible. > > --8<-- > diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h > index 5c0318509f9e..5ed81c5746ec 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h > +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h > @@ -832,6 +832,7 @@ typedef struct pglist_data { > unsigned long node_spanned_pages; /* total size of physical page > range, including holes */ > int node_id; > + wait_queue_head_t reclaim_wait; > wait_queue_head_t kswapd_wait; > wait_queue_head_t pfmemalloc_wait; > struct task_struct *kswapd; /* Protected by > diff --git a/mm/backing-dev.c b/mm/backing-dev.c > index 6122c78ce914..21a9cd693d12 100644 > --- a/mm/backing-dev.c > +++ b/mm/backing-dev.c > @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ > #include <linux/module.h> > #include <linux/writeback.h> > #include <linux/device.h> > +#include <linux/swap.h> > #include <trace/events/writeback.h> > > struct backing_dev_info noop_backing_dev_info; > @@ -1013,25 +1014,41 @@ void set_bdi_congested(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, int sync) > EXPORT_SYMBOL(set_bdi_congested); > > /** > - * congestion_wait - wait for a backing_dev to become uncongested > - * @sync: SYNC or ASYNC IO > - * @timeout: timeout in jiffies > + * congestion_wait - the docs are now worthless but avoiding a rename > * > - * Waits for up to @timeout jiffies for a backing_dev (any backing_dev) to exit > - * write congestion. If no backing_devs are congested then just wait for the > - * next write to be completed. > + * New thing -- wait for a timeout or reclaim to make progress > */ > long congestion_wait(int sync, long timeout) > { > + pg_data_t *pgdat; > long ret; > unsigned long start = jiffies; > DEFINE_WAIT(wait); > - wait_queue_head_t *wqh = &congestion_wqh[sync]; > + wait_queue_head_t *wqh; > > - prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); > - ret = io_schedule_timeout(timeout); > + /* Never let kswapd sleep on itself */ > + if (current_is_kswapd()) > + goto trace; > + > + /* > + * Dangerous, local memory may be forbidden by cpuset or policies, > + * use first eligible zone in zonelists node instead > + */ > + preempt_disable(); > + pgdat = NODE_DATA(smp_processor_id()); > + preempt_enable(); > + wqh = &pgdat->reclaim_wait; > + > + /* > + * Should probably check watermark of suitable zones here > + * in case this is spuriously called > + */ > + > + prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > + ret = schedule_timeout(timeout); > finish_wait(wqh, &wait); > > +trace: > trace_writeback_congestion_wait(jiffies_to_usecs(timeout), > jiffies_to_usecs(jiffies - start)); > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c > index 5b09e71c9ce7..4b87b73d1264 100644 > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c > @@ -7418,6 +7418,7 @@ static void __meminit pgdat_init_internals(struct pglist_data *pgdat) > pgdat_init_split_queue(pgdat); > pgdat_init_kcompactd(pgdat); > > + init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->reclaim_wait); > init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->kswapd_wait); > init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait); > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c > index 158c9c93d03c..0ac2cf6be5e3 100644 > --- a/mm/vmscan.c > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c > @@ -2888,6 +2888,8 @@ static void shrink_node_memcgs(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) > } while ((memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, memcg, NULL))); > } > > +static bool pgdat_balanced(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int highest_zoneidx); > + > static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) > { > struct reclaim_state *reclaim_state = current->reclaim_state; > @@ -3070,6 +3072,18 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) > sc)) > goto again; > > + /* > + * Might be race-prone, more appropriate to do this when exiting > + * direct reclaim and when kswapd finds that pgdat is balanced. > + * May also be appropriate to update pgdat_balanced to take > + * a watermark level and wakeup when min watermarks are ok > + * instead of waiting for the high watermark > + */ > + if (waitqueue_active(&pgdat->reclaim_wait) && > + pgdat_balanced(pgdat, 0, ZONE_MOVABLE)) { > + wake_up_interruptible(&pgdat->reclaim_wait); > + } > + > /* > * Kswapd gives up on balancing particular nodes after too > * many failures to reclaim anything from them and goes to > >
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 05:34:32PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 10:13:04AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > Indefinite loops waiting for memory allocation are discouraged by > > documentation in gfp.h which says the use of __GFP_NOFAIL that it > > > > is definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless > > loop around allocator. > > > > Such loops that use congestion_wait() are particularly unwise as > > congestion_wait() is indistinguishable from > > schedule_timeout_uninterruptible() in practice - and should be > > deprecated. > > > > So this patch changes the two loops in ext4_ext_truncate() to use > > __GFP_NOFAIL instead of looping. > > > > As the allocation is multiple layers deeper in the call stack, this > > requires passing the EXT4_EX_NOFAIL flag down and handling it in various > > places. > > > > Of particular interest is the ext4_journal_start family of calls which > > can now have EXT4_EX_NOFAIL 'or'ed in to the 'type'. This could be seen > > as a blurring of types. However 'type' is 8 bits, and EXT4_EX_NOFAIL is > > a high bit, so it is safe in practice. > > > > jbd2__journal_start() is enhanced so that the gfp_t flags passed are > > used for *all* allocations. > > > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> > > I'm not a fan. GFP_NOFAIL allows access to emergency reserves increasing > the risk of a livelock if memory is completely depleted where as some > callers can afford to wait. Undocumented behaviour, never mentioned or communicated to users in any __GFP_NOFAIL discussion I've taken part in until now. How is it different to, say, GFP_ATOMIC? i.e. Does GFP_NOFAIL actually imply GFP_ATOMIC, or is there some other undocumented behaviour going on here? We've already go ~80 __GFP_NOFAIL allocation contexts in fs/ and the vast majority of the are GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL or GFP_NOFS | __GFP_NOFAIL, so some clarification on what this actually means would be really good... > The key event should be reclaim making progress. Yup, that's what we need, but I don't see why it needs to be exposed outside the allocation code at all. > The hack below is > intended to vaguely demonstrate how blocking can be based on reclaim > making progress instead of "congestion" but has not even been booted. A > more complete overhaul may involve introducing > reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, long timeout, nodemask_t *nodemask) > and > reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, long timeout) I think that's racy. There's no guarantee that the node we are currently running on matches the cpu/node id that we failed to allocate from. Pre-emptible kernels and all that. IOWs, I think needs to be completely internal to the reclaim infrastructure and based on the current context we are trying to reclaim from. That way "GFP_RETRY_FOREVER" allocation contexts don't have to jump through an ever changing tangle of hoops to make basic "never-fail" allocation semantics behave correctly. > and converting congestion_wait and wait_iff_congestion to calling > reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask which waits on the first usable node > and then audit every single congestion_wait() user to see which API > they should call. Further work would be to establish whether the page allocator should > call reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask() if direct reclaim is not making > progress or whether that should be in vmscan.c. Conceivably, GFP_NOFAIL > could then soften its access to emergency reserves but I haven't given > it much thought. > > Yes it's significant work, but it would be a better than letting > __GFP_NOFAIL propagate further and kicking us down the road. Unfortunately, that seems to ignore the fact that we still need never-fail allocation semantics for stable system performance. Like it or not the requirements for __GFP_NOFAIL (and "retry forever" equivalent semantics) or open coded endless retry loops are *never* going away. IOWs, I'd suggest that we should think about how to formally support "never-fail" allocation semantics in both the API and the implementation in such a way that we don't end up with this __GFP_NOFAIL catch-22 ever again. Having the memory reclaim code wait on forwards progress instead of congestion as you propose here would be a core part of providing "never-fail" allocations... > This hack is terrible, it's not the right way to do it, it's just to > illustrate the idea of "waiting on memory should be based on reclaim > making progress and not the state of storage" is not impossible. I've been saying that is how reclaim should work for years. :/ It was LFSMM 2013 or 2014 that I was advocating for memory reclaim to move to IO-less reclaim throttling based on the rate at which free pages are returned to the freelists similar to the way IO-less dirty page throttling is based on the rate dirty pages are cleaned. Relying on IO interactions (submitting IO or waiting for completion) for high level page state management has always been a bad way to throttle demand because it only provides indirect control and has poor feedback indication. It's also a good way to remove the dependency on direct reclaim - just sleep instead of duplicating the work that kswapd should already be doing in the background to reclaim pages... > --8<-- > diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h > index 5c0318509f9e..5ed81c5746ec 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h > +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h > @@ -832,6 +832,7 @@ typedef struct pglist_data { > unsigned long node_spanned_pages; /* total size of physical page > range, including holes */ > int node_id; > + wait_queue_head_t reclaim_wait; > wait_queue_head_t kswapd_wait; > wait_queue_head_t pfmemalloc_wait; > struct task_struct *kswapd; /* Protected by > diff --git a/mm/backing-dev.c b/mm/backing-dev.c > index 6122c78ce914..21a9cd693d12 100644 > --- a/mm/backing-dev.c > +++ b/mm/backing-dev.c > @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ > #include <linux/module.h> > #include <linux/writeback.h> > #include <linux/device.h> > +#include <linux/swap.h> > #include <trace/events/writeback.h> > > struct backing_dev_info noop_backing_dev_info; > @@ -1013,25 +1014,41 @@ void set_bdi_congested(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, int sync) > EXPORT_SYMBOL(set_bdi_congested); > > /** > - * congestion_wait - wait for a backing_dev to become uncongested > - * @sync: SYNC or ASYNC IO > - * @timeout: timeout in jiffies > + * congestion_wait - the docs are now worthless but avoiding a rename > * > - * Waits for up to @timeout jiffies for a backing_dev (any backing_dev) to exit > - * write congestion. If no backing_devs are congested then just wait for the > - * next write to be completed. > + * New thing -- wait for a timeout or reclaim to make progress > */ > long congestion_wait(int sync, long timeout) > { > + pg_data_t *pgdat; > long ret; > unsigned long start = jiffies; > DEFINE_WAIT(wait); > - wait_queue_head_t *wqh = &congestion_wqh[sync]; > + wait_queue_head_t *wqh; > > - prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); > - ret = io_schedule_timeout(timeout); > + /* Never let kswapd sleep on itself */ > + if (current_is_kswapd()) > + goto trace; I think this breaks the kswapd 100ms immediate reclaim backoff in shrink_node(). > + > + /* > + * Dangerous, local memory may be forbidden by cpuset or policies, > + * use first eligible zone in zonelists node instead > + */ > + preempt_disable(); > + pgdat = NODE_DATA(smp_processor_id()); > + preempt_enable(); > + wqh = &pgdat->reclaim_wait; This goes away if it is kept internal and is passed the reclaim pgdat context we just failed to reclaim pages from. > + > + /* > + * Should probably check watermark of suitable zones here > + * in case this is spuriously called > + */ Ditto. These hacks really make me think that an external "wait for memory reclaim to make progress before retrying allocation" behaviour is the wrong way to tackle this. It's always been a hack because open-coded retry loops had to be implemented everywhere for never-fail allocation semantics. Neil has the right idea by replacing such fail-never back-offs with actual allocation attempts that encapsulate waiting for reclaim to make progress. This needs to be a formally supported function of memory allocation, and then these backoffs can be properly integrated into the memory reclaim retry mechanism instead of being poorly grafted onto the side... Whether that be __GFP_NOFAIL or GFP_RETRY_FOREVER that doesn't have the "dip into reserves" behaviour of __GFP_NOFAIL (which we clearly don't need because open coded retry loops have clearly work well enough for production systems for many years), I don't really care. But I think the memory allocation subsystem needs to move beyond "ahhhh, never-fail is too hard!!!!" and take steps to integrate this behaviour properly so that it can be made to work a whole lot better than it currently does.... Cheers, Dave.
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 10:13:04AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > Of particular interest is the ext4_journal_start family of calls which > can now have EXT4_EX_NOFAIL 'or'ed in to the 'type'. This could be seen > as a blurring of types. However 'type' is 8 bits, and EXT4_EX_NOFAIL is > a high bit, so it is safe in practice. I'm really not fond of this type blurring. What I'd suggeset doing instead is adding a "gfp_t gfp_mask" parameter to the __ext4_journal_start_sb(). With the exception of one call site in fs/ext4/ialloc.c, most of the callers of __ext4_journal_start_sb() are via #define helper macros or inline funcions. So it would just require adding a GFP_NOFS as an extra parameter to the various macros and inline functions which call __ext4_journal_start_sb() in ext4_jbd2.h. The function ext4_journal_start_with_revoke() is called exactly once so we could just bury the __GFP_NOFAIL in the definition of that macros, e.g.: #define ext4_journal_start_with_revoke(inode, type, blocks, revoke_creds) \ __ext4_journal_start((inode), __LINE__, (type), (blocks), 0, \ GFP_NOFS | __GFP_NOFAIL, (revoke_creds)) but it's probably better to do something like this: #define ext4_journal_start_with_revoke(gfp_mask, inode, type, blocks, revoke_creds) \ __ext4_journal_start((inode), __LINE__, (type), (blocks), 0, \ gfp_mask, (revoke_creds)) So it's explicit in the C function ext4_ext_remove_space() in fs/ext4/extents.c that we are explicitly requesting the __GFP_NOFAIL behavior. Does that make sense? - Ted
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 10:13:04AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > > > Of particular interest is the ext4_journal_start family of calls which > > can now have EXT4_EX_NOFAIL 'or'ed in to the 'type'. This could be seen > > as a blurring of types. However 'type' is 8 bits, and EXT4_EX_NOFAIL is > > a high bit, so it is safe in practice. > > I'm really not fond of this type blurring. What I'd suggeset doing > instead is adding a "gfp_t gfp_mask" parameter to the > __ext4_journal_start_sb(). With the exception of one call site in > fs/ext4/ialloc.c, most of the callers of __ext4_journal_start_sb() are > via #define helper macros or inline funcions. So it would just > require adding a GFP_NOFS as an extra parameter to the various macros > and inline functions which call __ext4_journal_start_sb() in > ext4_jbd2.h. > > The function ext4_journal_start_with_revoke() is called exactly once > so we could just bury the __GFP_NOFAIL in the definition of that > macros, e.g.: > > #define ext4_journal_start_with_revoke(inode, type, blocks, revoke_creds) \ > __ext4_journal_start((inode), __LINE__, (type), (blocks), 0, \ > GFP_NOFS | __GFP_NOFAIL, (revoke_creds)) > > but it's probably better to do something like this: > > #define ext4_journal_start_with_revoke(gfp_mask, inode, type, blocks, revoke_creds) \ > __ext4_journal_start((inode), __LINE__, (type), (blocks), 0, \ > gfp_mask, (revoke_creds)) > > So it's explicit in the C function ext4_ext_remove_space() in > fs/ext4/extents.c that we are explicitly requesting the __GFP_NOFAIL > behavior. > > Does that make sense? Mostly. Adding gfp_mask to __ext4_journal_start_sb() make perfect sense. There doesn't seem much point adding one to __ext4_journal_start(), we can have ext4_journal_start_with_revoke() call __ext4_journal_start_sb() directly. But I cannot see what it doesn't already do that. i.e. why have the inline __ext4_journal_start() at all? Is it OK if I don't use that for ext4_journal_start_with_revoke()? Thanks, NeilBrown
On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 09:55:35AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 05:34:32PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 10:13:04AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > > Indefinite loops waiting for memory allocation are discouraged by > > > documentation in gfp.h which says the use of __GFP_NOFAIL that it > > > > > > is definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless > > > loop around allocator. > > > > > > Such loops that use congestion_wait() are particularly unwise as > > > congestion_wait() is indistinguishable from > > > schedule_timeout_uninterruptible() in practice - and should be > > > deprecated. > > > > > > So this patch changes the two loops in ext4_ext_truncate() to use > > > __GFP_NOFAIL instead of looping. > > > > > > As the allocation is multiple layers deeper in the call stack, this > > > requires passing the EXT4_EX_NOFAIL flag down and handling it in various > > > places. > > > > > > Of particular interest is the ext4_journal_start family of calls which > > > can now have EXT4_EX_NOFAIL 'or'ed in to the 'type'. This could be seen > > > as a blurring of types. However 'type' is 8 bits, and EXT4_EX_NOFAIL is > > > a high bit, so it is safe in practice. > > > > > > jbd2__journal_start() is enhanced so that the gfp_t flags passed are > > > used for *all* allocations. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> > > > > I'm not a fan. GFP_NOFAIL allows access to emergency reserves increasing > > the risk of a livelock if memory is completely depleted where as some > > callers can afford to wait. > > Undocumented behaviour, never mentioned or communicated to users in > any __GFP_NOFAIL discussion I've taken part in until now. > > How is it different to, say, GFP_ATOMIC? i.e. Does GFP_NOFAIL > actually imply GFP_ATOMIC, or is there some other undocumented > behaviour going on here? > Hmm, it's similar but not the same as GFP_ATOMIC. The most severe aspect of depleting emergency reserves comes from this block which is relevant when the system is effectively OOM /* * XXX: GFP_NOFS allocations should rather fail than rely on * other request to make a forward progress. * We are in an unfortunate situation where out_of_memory cannot * do much for this context but let's try it to at least get * access to memory reserved if the current task is killed (see * out_of_memory). Once filesystems are ready to handle allocation * failures more gracefully we should just bail out here. */ /* Exhausted what can be done so it's blame time */ if (out_of_memory(&oc) || WARN_ON_ONCE(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL)) { *did_some_progress = 1; /* * Help non-failing allocations by giving them access to memory * reserves */ if (gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL) page = __alloc_pages_cpuset_fallback(gfp_mask, order, ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS, ac); } The less severe aspect comes from /* * Help non-failing allocations by giving them access to memory * reserves but do not use ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS because this * could deplete whole memory reserves which would just make * the situation worse */ page = __alloc_pages_cpuset_fallback(gfp_mask, order, ALLOC_HARDER, ac); if (page) goto got_pg; This doesn't dip into reserves as much as an atomic allocation does but it competes with them. > We've already go ~80 __GFP_NOFAIL allocation contexts in fs/ and the > vast majority of the are GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL or GFP_NOFS | > __GFP_NOFAIL, so some clarification on what this actually means > would be really good... > I'm not sure how much clarity can be given. Whatever the documented semantics, at some point under the current implementation __GFP_NOFAIL potentially competes with the same reserves as GFP_ATOMIC and has a path where watermarks are ignored entirely. > > The key event should be reclaim making progress. > > Yup, that's what we need, but I don't see why it needs to be exposed > outside the allocation code at all. > Probably not. At least some of it could be contained within reclaim itself to block when reclaim is not making progress as opposed to anything congestion related. That might still livelock if no progress can be made but that's not new, the OOM hammer should eventually kick in. > > The hack below is > > intended to vaguely demonstrate how blocking can be based on reclaim > > making progress instead of "congestion" but has not even been booted. A > > more complete overhaul may involve introducing > > reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, long timeout, nodemask_t *nodemask) > > and > > reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, long timeout) > > I think that's racy. There's no guarantee that the node we are > currently running on matches the cpu/node id that we failed to > allocate from. I know, I commented + /* + * Dangerous, local memory may be forbidden by cpuset or policies, + * use first eligible zone in zonelists node instead + */ There may be multiple nodes "we failed to allocate from", but the first eligible node is definitely one of them. There is the possibility that the first eligible node may be completely unreclaimable (all anonymous, no swap) in which case the timeout kicks in. I don't think this should be a global workqueue because there will be spurious wakeups. > Pre-emptible kernels and all that. IOWs, I think > needs to be completely internal to the reclaim infrastructure and > based on the current context we are trying to reclaim from. > A further step could be something similar to capture_control whereby reclaimed pages are immediately assigned to tasks blocked on reclaim_congestion_wait. It may be excessively complicated and overkill. > That way "GFP_RETRY_FOREVER" allocation contexts don't have to jump > through an ever changing tangle of hoops to make basic "never-fail" > allocation semantics behave correctly. > True and I can see what that is desirable. What I'm saying is that right now, increasing the use of __GFP_NOFAIL may cause a different set of problems (unbounded retries combined with ATOMIC allocation failures) as they compete for similar resources. > > and converting congestion_wait and wait_iff_congestion to calling > > reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask which waits on the first usable node > > and then audit every single congestion_wait() user to see which API > > they should call. Further work would be to establish whether the page allocator should > > call reclaim_congestion_wait_nodemask() if direct reclaim is not making > > progress or whether that should be in vmscan.c. Conceivably, GFP_NOFAIL > > could then soften its access to emergency reserves but I haven't given > > it much thought. > > > > Yes it's significant work, but it would be a better than letting > > __GFP_NOFAIL propagate further and kicking us down the road. > > Unfortunately, that seems to ignore the fact that we still need > never-fail allocation semantics for stable system performance. Like > it or not the requirements for __GFP_NOFAIL (and "retry forever" > equivalent semantics) or open coded endless retry loops > are *never* going away. > I'm aware there will be cases where never-fail allocation semantics are required, particularly in GFP_NOFS contexts. What I'm saying is that right now because throttling is based on imaginary "congestion" that increasing the use could result in live-lock like bugs when multiple users complete for similar emergency resources to atomic. Note that I didn't NACK this. > IOWs, I'd suggest that we should think about how to formally > support "never-fail" allocation semantics in both the API and the > implementation in such a way that we don't end up with this > __GFP_NOFAIL catch-22 ever again. Having the memory reclaim code > wait on forwards progress instead of congestion as you propose here > would be a core part of providing "never-fail" allocations... > > > This hack is terrible, it's not the right way to do it, it's just to > > illustrate the idea of "waiting on memory should be based on reclaim > > making progress and not the state of storage" is not impossible. > > I've been saying that is how reclaim should work for years. :/ > > It was LFSMM 2013 or 2014 that I was advocating for memory reclaim > to move to IO-less reclaim throttling based on the rate at which > free pages are returned to the freelists similar to the way IO-less > dirty page throttling is based on the rate dirty pages are cleaned. > I'm going to guess no one ever tried. > Relying on IO interactions (submitting IO or waiting for completion) > for high level page state management has always been a bad way to > throttle demand because it only provides indirect control and has > poor feedback indication. > Also true. > It's also a good way to remove the dependency on direct reclaim - > just sleep instead of duplicating the work that kswapd should > already be doing in the background to reclaim pages... > Even for direct reclaim, I do think that the number of direct reclaimers should be limited with the rest going to sleep. At some point, excessive direct reclaim tasks are simply hammering the lru lock. > > --8<-- > > diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h > > index 5c0318509f9e..5ed81c5746ec 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h > > +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h > > @@ -832,6 +832,7 @@ typedef struct pglist_data { > > unsigned long node_spanned_pages; /* total size of physical page > > range, including holes */ > > int node_id; > > + wait_queue_head_t reclaim_wait; > > wait_queue_head_t kswapd_wait; > > wait_queue_head_t pfmemalloc_wait; > > struct task_struct *kswapd; /* Protected by > > diff --git a/mm/backing-dev.c b/mm/backing-dev.c > > index 6122c78ce914..21a9cd693d12 100644 > > --- a/mm/backing-dev.c > > +++ b/mm/backing-dev.c > > @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ > > #include <linux/module.h> > > #include <linux/writeback.h> > > #include <linux/device.h> > > +#include <linux/swap.h> > > #include <trace/events/writeback.h> > > > > struct backing_dev_info noop_backing_dev_info; > > @@ -1013,25 +1014,41 @@ void set_bdi_congested(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, int sync) > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(set_bdi_congested); > > > > /** > > - * congestion_wait - wait for a backing_dev to become uncongested > > - * @sync: SYNC or ASYNC IO > > - * @timeout: timeout in jiffies > > + * congestion_wait - the docs are now worthless but avoiding a rename > > * > > - * Waits for up to @timeout jiffies for a backing_dev (any backing_dev) to exit > > - * write congestion. If no backing_devs are congested then just wait for the > > - * next write to be completed. > > + * New thing -- wait for a timeout or reclaim to make progress > > */ > > long congestion_wait(int sync, long timeout) > > { > > + pg_data_t *pgdat; > > long ret; > > unsigned long start = jiffies; > > DEFINE_WAIT(wait); > > - wait_queue_head_t *wqh = &congestion_wqh[sync]; > > + wait_queue_head_t *wqh; > > > > - prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); > > - ret = io_schedule_timeout(timeout); > > + /* Never let kswapd sleep on itself */ > > + if (current_is_kswapd()) > > + goto trace; > > I think this breaks the kswapd 100ms immediate reclaim backoff in > shrink_node(). > Yep, it is. That would definitely need better care. > > + > > + /* > > + * Dangerous, local memory may be forbidden by cpuset or policies, > > + * use first eligible zone in zonelists node instead > > + */ > > + preempt_disable(); > > + pgdat = NODE_DATA(smp_processor_id()); > > + preempt_enable(); > > + wqh = &pgdat->reclaim_wait; > > This goes away if it is kept internal and is passed the reclaim > pgdat context we just failed to reclaim pages from. > Yep, that would also work if this was called only from reclaim contexts or mm internally. Some helper would still be needed to implement an alternative congestion_wait that looks up the same information until congestion_wait callers can be removed. Again, I wasn't trying to offer a correct implementation, only illustrating that it's perfectly possible to throttle based on reclaim making progress instead of "congestion". > > + > > + /* > > + * Should probably check watermark of suitable zones here > > + * in case this is spuriously called > > + */ > > Ditto. > > These hacks really make me think that an external "wait for memory > reclaim to make progress before retrying allocation" behaviour is > the wrong way to tackle this. It's always been a hack because > open-coded retry loops had to be implemented everywhere for > never-fail allocation semantics. > > Neil has the right idea by replacing such fail-never back-offs with > actual allocation attempts that encapsulate waiting for reclaim to > make progress. This needs to be a formally supported function of > memory allocation, and then these backoffs can be properly > integrated into the memory reclaim retry mechanism instead of being > poorly grafted onto the side... > I'm not necessarily opposed to this. What I'm saying is that doing the conversion now *MIGHT* mean an increase in live-lock-like bugs because with the current implementation, the callers may not sleep/throttle in the same way the crappy "loop around congestion_wait" implementations did. > Whether that be __GFP_NOFAIL or GFP_RETRY_FOREVER that doesn't have > the "dip into reserves" behaviour of __GFP_NOFAIL (which we clearly > don't need because open coded retry loops have clearly work well > enough for production systems for many years), I don't really care. > I suspected this was true and that it might be appropriate for __GFP_NOFAIL to obey normal watermarks unless __GFP_HIGH is also specified if it's absolutely necessary but I'm not sure because I haven't put enough thought into it. > But I think the memory allocation subsystem needs to move beyond > "ahhhh, never-fail is too hard!!!!" and take steps to integrate this > behaviour properly so that it can be made to work a whole lot better > than it currently does.... > Again, not opposed. It's simply a heads-up that converting now may cause problems that manifest as livelock-like bugs unless, at minimum, internal reclaim bases throttling on some reclaim making progress instead of congestion_wait. Given my current load, I can't promise I'd find the time to follow through with converting the hack into a proper implementation but someone reading linux-mm might. Either way, I felt it was necessary to at least warn about the hazards.
On Wed 15-09-21 07:48:11, Neil Brown wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 2021, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 10:13:04AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > > Indefinite loops waiting for memory allocation are discouraged by > > > documentation in gfp.h which says the use of __GFP_NOFAIL that it > > > > > > is definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless > > > loop around allocator. > > > > > > Such loops that use congestion_wait() are particularly unwise as > > > congestion_wait() is indistinguishable from > > > schedule_timeout_uninterruptible() in practice - and should be > > > deprecated. > > > > > > So this patch changes the two loops in ext4_ext_truncate() to use > > > __GFP_NOFAIL instead of looping. > > > > > > As the allocation is multiple layers deeper in the call stack, this > > > requires passing the EXT4_EX_NOFAIL flag down and handling it in various > > > places. > > > > > > Of particular interest is the ext4_journal_start family of calls which > > > can now have EXT4_EX_NOFAIL 'or'ed in to the 'type'. This could be seen > > > as a blurring of types. However 'type' is 8 bits, and EXT4_EX_NOFAIL is > > > a high bit, so it is safe in practice. > > > > > > jbd2__journal_start() is enhanced so that the gfp_t flags passed are > > > used for *all* allocations. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> > > > > I'm not a fan. GFP_NOFAIL allows access to emergency reserves increasing > > the risk of a livelock if memory is completely depleted where as some > > callers can afford to wait. > > Maybe we should wind back and focus on the documentation patches. > As quoted above, mm.h says: > > > > is definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless > > > loop around allocator. > > but you seem to be saying that is wrong. I'd certainly like to get the > documentation right before changing any code. > > Why does __GFP_NOFAIL access the reserves? Why not require that the > relevant "Try harder" flag (__GFP_ATOMIC or __GFP_MEMALLOC) be included > with __GFP_NOFAIL if that is justified? Does 5020e285856c ("mm, oom: give __GFP_NOFAIL allocations access to memory reserves") help? I would be worried to make the semantic even more complex than already is. Access to memory reserves is an implementation detail that the page allocator does currently. Callers shouldn't really be worried about that. I do not ever remember any actual NOFAIL triggered memory exhaustion. I have seen that to happen for unrestricted access to memory reserves by OOM victim though. Hence cd04ae1e2dc8 ("mm, oom: do not rely on TIF_MEMDIE for memory reserves access"). We can consider something similar if NOFAIL allocation really tend to show a similar problem. We do not want callers to care about OOM sitauations for this kind of requests. __GFP_NOFAIL | __GFP_HIGH is certainly something that is a valid usage but I wouldn't base OOM behavior based on that. > There are over 100 __GFP_NOFAIL allocation sites. I don't feel like > reviewing them all and seeing if any really need a try-harder flag. > Can we rename __GFP_NOFAIL to __GFP_NEVERFAIL and then > #define __GFP_NOFAIL (__GFP_NEVERFAIL | __GFP_ATOMIC) > and encourage the use of __GFP_NEVERFAIL in future? Doesn't this add even more complexity? > When __GFP_NOFAIL loops, it calls congestion_wait() internally. That > certainly needs to be fixed and the ideas you present below are > certainly worth considering when trying to understand how to address > that. I'd rather fix it once there in page_alloc.c rather then export a > waiting API like congestion_wait(). That would provide more > flexibility. e.g. a newly freed page could be handed directly back to > the waiter. Completely agreed here. We really do not want people to open code NOFAIL unless they can do something really subsystem specific that would help to make a forward progress.
On Wed 15-09-21 09:59:04, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 09:55:35AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > That way "GFP_RETRY_FOREVER" allocation contexts don't have to jump > > through an ever changing tangle of hoops to make basic "never-fail" > > allocation semantics behave correctly. > > > > True and I can see what that is desirable. What I'm saying is that right > now, increasing the use of __GFP_NOFAIL may cause a different set of > problems (unbounded retries combined with ATOMIC allocation failures) as > they compete for similar resources. I have commented on reasoning behind the above code in other reply. Let me just comment on this particular concern. I completely do agree that any use of __GFP_NOFAIL should be carefully evaluated. This is a very strong recuirement and it should be used only as a last resort. On the other hand converting an existing open coded nofail code that _doesn't_ really do any clever tricks to allow a forward progress (e.g. dropping locks, kicking some internal caching mechinisms etc.) should just be turned into __GPF_NOFAIL. Not only it makes it easier to spot that code but it also allows the page allocator to behave consistently and predictably. If the existing heuristic wrt. memory reserves to GFP_NOFAIL turns out to be suboptimal we can fix it for all those users. Dropping the rest of the email which talks about reclaim changes because I will need much more time to digest that. [...]
On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 09:59:04AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > Yup, that's what we need, but I don't see why it needs to be exposed > > outside the allocation code at all. > > > > Probably not. At least some of it could be contained within reclaim > itself to block when reclaim is not making progress as opposed to anything > congestion related. That might still livelock if no progress can be made > but that's not new, the OOM hammer should eventually kick in. > There are two sides to the reclaim-related throttling 1. throttling because zero progress is being made 2. throttling because there are too many dirty pages or pages under writeback cycling through the LRU too quickly. The dirty page aspects (and the removal of wait_iff_congested which is almost completely broken) could be done with something like the following (completly untested). The downside is that end_page_writeback() takes an atomic penalty if reclaim is throttled but at that point the system is struggling anyway so I doubt it matters. --8<-- diff --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h b/include/linux/backing-dev.h index ac7f231b8825..9fb1f0ae273c 100644 --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h @@ -154,7 +154,6 @@ static inline int wb_congested(struct bdi_writeback *wb, int cong_bits) } long congestion_wait(int sync, long timeout); -long wait_iff_congested(int sync, long timeout); static inline bool mapping_can_writeback(struct address_space *mapping) { diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h index 6a1d79d84675..5a289ada48cb 100644 --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h @@ -841,6 +841,9 @@ typedef struct pglist_data { int node_id; wait_queue_head_t kswapd_wait; wait_queue_head_t pfmemalloc_wait; + wait_queue_head_t reclaim_wait; /* wq for throttling reclaim */ + atomic_t nr_reclaim_throttled; /* nr of throtted tasks */ + atomic_t nr_reclaim_written; /* nr pages written since throttled */ struct task_struct *kswapd; /* Protected by mem_hotplug_begin/end() */ int kswapd_order; diff --git a/include/trace/events/writeback.h b/include/trace/events/writeback.h index 840d1ba84cf5..3bc759b81897 100644 --- a/include/trace/events/writeback.h +++ b/include/trace/events/writeback.h @@ -763,13 +763,6 @@ DEFINE_EVENT(writeback_congest_waited_template, writeback_congestion_wait, TP_ARGS(usec_timeout, usec_delayed) ); -DEFINE_EVENT(writeback_congest_waited_template, writeback_wait_iff_congested, - - TP_PROTO(unsigned int usec_timeout, unsigned int usec_delayed), - - TP_ARGS(usec_timeout, usec_delayed) -); - DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(writeback_single_inode_template, TP_PROTO(struct inode *inode, diff --git a/mm/backing-dev.c b/mm/backing-dev.c index 4a9d4e27d0d9..0ea1a105eae5 100644 --- a/mm/backing-dev.c +++ b/mm/backing-dev.c @@ -1041,51 +1041,3 @@ long congestion_wait(int sync, long timeout) return ret; } EXPORT_SYMBOL(congestion_wait); - -/** - * wait_iff_congested - Conditionally wait for a backing_dev to become uncongested or a pgdat to complete writes - * @sync: SYNC or ASYNC IO - * @timeout: timeout in jiffies - * - * In the event of a congested backing_dev (any backing_dev) this waits - * for up to @timeout jiffies for either a BDI to exit congestion of the - * given @sync queue or a write to complete. - * - * The return value is 0 if the sleep is for the full timeout. Otherwise, - * it is the number of jiffies that were still remaining when the function - * returned. return_value == timeout implies the function did not sleep. - */ -long wait_iff_congested(int sync, long timeout) -{ - long ret; - unsigned long start = jiffies; - DEFINE_WAIT(wait); - wait_queue_head_t *wqh = &congestion_wqh[sync]; - - /* - * If there is no congestion, yield if necessary instead - * of sleeping on the congestion queue - */ - if (atomic_read(&nr_wb_congested[sync]) == 0) { - cond_resched(); - - /* In case we scheduled, work out time remaining */ - ret = timeout - (jiffies - start); - if (ret < 0) - ret = 0; - - goto out; - } - - /* Sleep until uncongested or a write happens */ - prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); - ret = io_schedule_timeout(timeout); - finish_wait(wqh, &wait); - -out: - trace_writeback_wait_iff_congested(jiffies_to_usecs(timeout), - jiffies_to_usecs(jiffies - start)); - - return ret; -} -EXPORT_SYMBOL(wait_iff_congested); diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c index dae481293b5d..b9be9afa4308 100644 --- a/mm/filemap.c +++ b/mm/filemap.c @@ -1606,6 +1606,8 @@ void end_page_writeback(struct page *page) smp_mb__after_atomic(); wake_up_page(page, PG_writeback); put_page(page); + + acct_reclaim_writeback(page); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(end_page_writeback); diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h index cf3cb933eba3..47e77009e0d5 100644 --- a/mm/internal.h +++ b/mm/internal.h @@ -34,6 +34,13 @@ void page_writeback_init(void); +void __acct_reclaim_writeback(struct page *page); +static inline void acct_reclaim_writeback(struct page *page) +{ + if (atomic_read(&page_pgdat(page)->nr_reclaim_throttled)) + __acct_reclaim_writeback(page); +} + vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf); void free_pgtables(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *start_vma, diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c index b37435c274cf..d849ddfc1e51 100644 --- a/mm/page_alloc.c +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c @@ -7396,6 +7396,7 @@ static void __meminit pgdat_init_internals(struct pglist_data *pgdat) init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->kswapd_wait); init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait); + init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->reclaim_wait); pgdat_page_ext_init(pgdat); lruvec_init(&pgdat->__lruvec); diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c index 74296c2d1fed..b209564766b0 100644 --- a/mm/vmscan.c +++ b/mm/vmscan.c @@ -1006,6 +1006,40 @@ static void handle_write_error(struct address_space *mapping, unlock_page(page); } +static void +reclaim_writeback_throttle(pg_data_t *pgdat, long timeout) +{ + wait_queue_head_t *wqh = &pgdat->reclaim_wait; + long ret; + DEFINE_WAIT(wait); + + atomic_inc(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_throttled); + + prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); + ret = schedule_timeout(timeout); + finish_wait(&pgdat->reclaim_wait, &wait); + + if (atomic_dec_and_test(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_throttled)) + atomic_set(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_written, 0); + + /* TODO: Add tracepoint to track time sleeping */ +} + +/* + * Account for pages written if tasks are throttled waiting on dirty + * pages to clean. If enough pages have been cleaned since throttling + * started then wakeup the throttled tasks. + */ +void __acct_reclaim_writeback(struct page *page) +{ + pg_data_t *pgdat = page_pgdat(page); + int nr_written = atomic_inc_return(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_written); + int nr_throttled = atomic_read(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_throttled); + + if (nr_written > SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX * nr_throttled) + wake_up_interruptible(&pgdat->reclaim_wait); +} + /* possible outcome of pageout() */ typedef enum { /* failed to write page out, page is locked */ @@ -1412,9 +1446,8 @@ static unsigned int shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list, /* * The number of dirty pages determines if a node is marked - * reclaim_congested which affects wait_iff_congested. kswapd - * will stall and start writing pages if the tail of the LRU - * is all dirty unqueued pages. + * reclaim_congested. kswapd will stall and start writing + * pages if the tail of the LRU is all dirty unqueued pages. */ page_check_dirty_writeback(page, &dirty, &writeback); if (dirty || writeback) @@ -3180,19 +3213,20 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) * If kswapd scans pages marked for immediate * reclaim and under writeback (nr_immediate), it * implies that pages are cycling through the LRU - * faster than they are written so also forcibly stall. + * faster than they are written so forcibly stall + * until some pages complete writeback. */ if (sc->nr.immediate) - congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10); + reclaim_writeback_throttle(pgdat, HZ/10); } /* * Tag a node/memcg as congested if all the dirty pages * scanned were backed by a congested BDI and - * wait_iff_congested will stall. + * non-kswapd tasks will stall on reclaim_writeback_throttle. * * Legacy memcg will stall in page writeback so avoid forcibly - * stalling in wait_iff_congested(). + * stalling in reclaim_writeback_throttle(). */ if ((current_is_kswapd() || (cgroup_reclaim(sc) && writeback_throttling_sane(sc))) && @@ -3208,7 +3242,7 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) if (!current_is_kswapd() && current_may_throttle() && !sc->hibernation_mode && test_bit(LRUVEC_CONGESTED, &target_lruvec->flags)) - wait_iff_congested(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10); + reclaim_writeback_throttle(pgdat, HZ/10); if (should_continue_reclaim(pgdat, sc->nr_reclaimed - nr_reclaimed, sc)) @@ -4286,6 +4320,8 @@ static int kswapd(void *p) WRITE_ONCE(pgdat->kswapd_order, 0); WRITE_ONCE(pgdat->kswapd_highest_zoneidx, MAX_NR_ZONES); + atomic_set(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_throttled, 0); + atomic_set(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_written, 0); for ( ; ; ) { bool ret;
On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 03:25:40PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > Adding gfp_mask to __ext4_journal_start_sb() make perfect sense. > There doesn't seem much point adding one to __ext4_journal_start(), > we can have ext4_journal_start_with_revoke() call > __ext4_journal_start_sb() directly. > But I cannot see what it doesn't already do that. > i.e. why have the inline __ext4_journal_start() at all? > Is it OK if I don't use that for ext4_journal_start_with_revoke()? Sure. I think the only reason why we have __ext4_journal_start() as an inline function at all was for historical reasons. That is, we modified __ext4_journal_start() so that it took a struct super, and instead of changing all of the macros which called __ext4_journal_start(), we named it to be __ext4_journal_start_sb() and added the inline definition of __ext4_journal_start() to avoid changing all of the existing users of __ext4_journal_start(). So sure, it's fine not to use that for ext4_journal_start_with_revoke(), and we probably should clean up the use of __ext4_journal_start() at some point. That's unrelated to your work, though. Cheers, - Ted
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 15-09-21 07:48:11, Neil Brown wrote: > > > > Why does __GFP_NOFAIL access the reserves? Why not require that the > > relevant "Try harder" flag (__GFP_ATOMIC or __GFP_MEMALLOC) be included > > with __GFP_NOFAIL if that is justified? > > Does 5020e285856c ("mm, oom: give __GFP_NOFAIL allocations access to > memory reserves") help? Yes, that helps. A bit. I'm not fond of the clause "the allocation request might have come with some locks held". What if it doesn't? Does it still have to pay the price. Should we not require that the caller indicate if any locks are held? That way callers which don't hold locks can use __GFP_NOFAIL without worrying about imposing on other code. Or is it so rare that __GFP_NOFAIL would be used without holding a lock that it doesn't matter? The other commit of interest is Commit: 6c18ba7a1899 ("mm: help __GFP_NOFAIL allocations which do not trigger OOM killer") I don't find the reasoning convincing. It is a bit like "Robbing Peter to pay Paul". It takes from the reserves to allow a __GFP_NOFAIL to proceed, with out any reason to think this particular allocation has any more 'right' to the reserves than anything else. While I don't like the reasoning in either of these, they do make it clear (to me) that the use of reserves is entirely an internal policy decision. They should *not* be seen as part of the API and callers should not have to be concerned about it when deciding whether to use __GFP_NOFAIL or not. The use of these reserves is, at most, a hypothetical problem. If it ever looks like becoming a real practical problem, it needs to be fixed internally to the page allocator. Maybe an extra water-mark which isn't quite as permissive as ALLOC_HIGH... I'm inclined to drop all references to reserves from the documentation for __GFP_NOFAIL. I think there are enough users already that adding a couple more isn't going to make problems substantially more likely. And more will be added anyway that the mm/ team won't have the opportunity or bandwidth to review. Meanwhile I'll see if I can understand the intricacies of alloc_page so that I can contibute to making it more predictable. Question: In those cases where an open-coded loop is appropriate, such as when you want to handle signals or can drop locks, how bad would it be to have a tight loop without any sleep? should_reclaim_retry() will sleep 100ms (sometimes...). Is that enough? __GFP_NOFAIL doesn't add any sleep when looping. Thanks, NeilBrown
On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 03:35:10PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 09:59:04AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > Yup, that's what we need, but I don't see why it needs to be exposed > > > outside the allocation code at all. > > > > > > > Probably not. At least some of it could be contained within reclaim > > itself to block when reclaim is not making progress as opposed to anything > > congestion related. That might still livelock if no progress can be made > > but that's not new, the OOM hammer should eventually kick in. > > > > There are two sides to the reclaim-related throttling > > 1. throttling because zero progress is being made > 2. throttling because there are too many dirty pages or pages under > writeback cycling through the LRU too quickly. > > The dirty page aspects (and the removal of wait_iff_congested which is > almost completely broken) could be done with something like the following > (completly untested). The downside is that end_page_writeback() takes an > atomic penalty if reclaim is throttled but at that point the system is > struggling anyway so I doubt it matters. The atomics are pretty nasty, as is directly accessing the pgdat on every call to end_page_writeback(). Those will be performance limiting factors. Indeed, we don't use atomics for dirty page throttling, which does dirty page accounting via percpu counters on the BDI and doesn't require wakeups. Also, we've already got per-node and per-zone counters there for dirty/write pending stats, so do we actually need new counters and wakeups here? i.e. balance_dirty_pages() does not have an explicit wakeup - it bases it's sleep time on the (memcg aware) measured writeback rate on the BDI the page belongs to and the amount of outstanding dirty data on that BDI. i.e. it estimates fairly accurately what the wait time for this task should be given the dirty page demand and current writeback progress being made is and just sleeps for that length of time. Ideally, that's what should be happening here - we should be able to calculate a page cleaning rate estimation and then base the sleep time on that. No wakeups needed - when we've waited for the estimated time, we try to reclaim again... In fact, why can't this "too many dirty pages" case just use the balance_dirty_pages() infrastructure to do the "wait for writeback" reclaim backoff? Why do we even need to re-invent the wheel here? > diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c > index dae481293b5d..b9be9afa4308 100644 > --- a/mm/filemap.c > +++ b/mm/filemap.c > @@ -1606,6 +1606,8 @@ void end_page_writeback(struct page *page) > smp_mb__after_atomic(); > wake_up_page(page, PG_writeback); > put_page(page); > + > + acct_reclaim_writeback(page); UAF - that would need to be before the put_page() call... Cheers, Dave.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 08:35:40AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 2021, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 15-09-21 07:48:11, Neil Brown wrote: > > > > > > Why does __GFP_NOFAIL access the reserves? Why not require that the > > > relevant "Try harder" flag (__GFP_ATOMIC or __GFP_MEMALLOC) be included > > > with __GFP_NOFAIL if that is justified? > > > > Does 5020e285856c ("mm, oom: give __GFP_NOFAIL allocations access to > > memory reserves") help? > > Yes, that helps. A bit. > > I'm not fond of the clause "the allocation request might have come with some > locks held". What if it doesn't? Does it still have to pay the price. > > Should we not require that the caller indicate if any locks are held? > That way callers which don't hold locks can use __GFP_NOFAIL without > worrying about imposing on other code. > > Or is it so rare that __GFP_NOFAIL would be used without holding a lock > that it doesn't matter? > > The other commit of interest is > > Commit: 6c18ba7a1899 ("mm: help __GFP_NOFAIL allocations which do not trigger OOM killer") > > I don't find the reasoning convincing. It is a bit like "Robbing Peter > to pay Paul". It takes from the reserves to allow a __GFP_NOFAIL to > proceed, with out any reason to think this particular allocation has any > more 'right' to the reserves than anything else. > > While I don't like the reasoning in either of these, they do make it > clear (to me) that the use of reserves is entirely an internal policy > decision. They should *not* be seen as part of the API and callers > should not have to be concerned about it when deciding whether to use > __GFP_NOFAIL or not. Agree totally with this - we just want to block until allocation succeeds, and if the -filesystem- deadlocks because allocation never succeeds then that's a problem that needs to be solved in the filesystem with a different memory allocation strategy... OTOH, setting up a single __GFP_NOFAIL call site with the ability to take the entire system down seems somewhat misguided. > The use of these reserves is, at most, a hypothetical problem. If it > ever looks like becoming a real practical problem, it needs to be fixed > internally to the page allocator. Maybe an extra water-mark which isn't > quite as permissive as ALLOC_HIGH... > > I'm inclined to drop all references to reserves from the documentation > for __GFP_NOFAIL. I think there are enough users already that adding a > couple more isn't going to make problems substantially more likely. And > more will be added anyway that the mm/ team won't have the opportunity > or bandwidth to review. Yup, we've been replacing open coded loops like in kmem_alloc() with explicit __GFP_NOFAIL usage for a while now: $ ▶ git grep __GFP_NOFAIL fs/xfs |wc -l 33 $ ANd we've got another 100 or so call sites planned for conversion to __GFP_NOFAIL. Hence the suggestion to remove the use of reserves from __GFP_NOFAIL seems like a sensible plan because it has never been necessary in the past for all the allocation sites we are converting from open coded loops to __GFP_NOFAIL... Cheers, Dave.
On Thu 16-09-21 08:35:40, Neil Brown wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 2021, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 15-09-21 07:48:11, Neil Brown wrote: > > > > > > Why does __GFP_NOFAIL access the reserves? Why not require that the > > > relevant "Try harder" flag (__GFP_ATOMIC or __GFP_MEMALLOC) be included > > > with __GFP_NOFAIL if that is justified? > > > > Does 5020e285856c ("mm, oom: give __GFP_NOFAIL allocations access to > > memory reserves") help? > > Yes, that helps. A bit. > > I'm not fond of the clause "the allocation request might have come with some > locks held". What if it doesn't? Does it still have to pay the price. > > Should we not require that the caller indicate if any locks are held? I do not think this would help much TBH. What if the lock in question doesn't impose any dependency through allocation problem? > That way callers which don't hold locks can use __GFP_NOFAIL without > worrying about imposing on other code. > > Or is it so rare that __GFP_NOFAIL would be used without holding a lock > that it doesn't matter? > > The other commit of interest is > > Commit: 6c18ba7a1899 ("mm: help __GFP_NOFAIL allocations which do not trigger OOM killer") > > I don't find the reasoning convincing. It is a bit like "Robbing Peter > to pay Paul". It takes from the reserves to allow a __GFP_NOFAIL to > proceed, with out any reason to think this particular allocation has any > more 'right' to the reserves than anything else. I do agree that this is not really optimal. I do not remember exact details but these changes were mostly based or inspired by extreme memory pressure testing by Tetsuo who has managed to trigger quite some corner cases. Especially those where NOFS was involved were problematic. > While I don't like the reasoning in either of these, they do make it > clear (to me) that the use of reserves is entirely an internal policy > decision. They should *not* be seen as part of the API and callers > should not have to be concerned about it when deciding whether to use > __GFP_NOFAIL or not. Yes. NOFAIL should have high enough bar to use - essentially there is no other way than use it - that memory reserves shouldn't be a road block. If we learn that existing users can seriously deplete memory reserves then we might need to reconsider the existing logic. So far there are no indications that NOFAIL would really cause any problems in that area. > The use of these reserves is, at most, a hypothetical problem. If it > ever looks like becoming a real practical problem, it needs to be fixed > internally to the page allocator. Maybe an extra water-mark which isn't > quite as permissive as ALLOC_HIGH... > > I'm inclined to drop all references to reserves from the documentation > for __GFP_NOFAIL. I have found your additions to the documentation useful. > I think there are enough users already that adding a > couple more isn't going to make problems substantially more likely. And > more will be added anyway that the mm/ team won't have the opportunity > or bandwidth to review. > > Meanwhile I'll see if I can understand the intricacies of alloc_page so > that I can contibute to making it more predictable. > > Question: In those cases where an open-coded loop is appropriate, such > as when you want to handle signals or can drop locks, how bad would it > be to have a tight loop without any sleep? > > should_reclaim_retry() will sleep 100ms (sometimes...). Is that enough? > __GFP_NOFAIL doesn't add any sleep when looping. Yeah, NOFAIL doesn't add any explicit sleep points. In general there is no guarantee that a sleepable allocation will sleep. We do cond_resched in general but sleeping is enforced only for worker contexts because WQ concurrency depends on an explicit sleeping. So to answer your question, if you really need to sleep between retries then you should do it manually but cond_resched can be implied.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 08:38:58AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 03:35:10PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 09:59:04AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > > Yup, that's what we need, but I don't see why it needs to be exposed > > > > outside the allocation code at all. > > > > > > > > > > Probably not. At least some of it could be contained within reclaim > > > itself to block when reclaim is not making progress as opposed to anything > > > congestion related. That might still livelock if no progress can be made > > > but that's not new, the OOM hammer should eventually kick in. > > > > > > > There are two sides to the reclaim-related throttling > > > > 1. throttling because zero progress is being made > > 2. throttling because there are too many dirty pages or pages under > > writeback cycling through the LRU too quickly. > > > > The dirty page aspects (and the removal of wait_iff_congested which is > > almost completely broken) could be done with something like the following > > (completly untested). The downside is that end_page_writeback() takes an > > atomic penalty if reclaim is throttled but at that point the system is > > struggling anyway so I doubt it matters. > > The atomics are pretty nasty, as is directly accessing the pgdat on > every call to end_page_writeback(). Those will be performance > limiting factors. Indeed, we don't use atomics for dirty page > throttling, which does dirty page accounting via > percpu counters on the BDI and doesn't require wakeups. > Thanks for taking a look! From end_page_writeback, the first atomic operation is an atomic read which is READ_ONCE on most architectures (alpha is a counter example as it has a memory barrier but alpha is niche). The main atomic penalty is when the system is reclaim throttled but it can be a per-cpu node page state counter instead. That sacrifices accuracy for speed but in this context, I think that's ok. As for accessing the pgdat structure, every vmstat counter for the node involves a pgdat lookup as the API is page-based and so there are already a bunch of pgdat lookups in the IO path. > Also, we've already got per-node and per-zone counters there for > dirty/write pending stats, so do we actually need new counters and > wakeups here? > I think we need at least a new counter because dirty/write pending stats do not tell us how many pages were cleaned since reclaim started hitting problems with dirty pages at the tail of the LRU. Reading dirty/write_pending stats at two points of time cannot be used to infer how many pages were cleaned during the same interval. At minimum, we'd need nr_dirtied and a new nr_cleaned stat to infer pages cleaned between two points in time. That can be done but if the new counters is NR_THROTTLED_WRITTEN (NR_WRITTEN while reclaim throttled), we only need one field in struct zone to track nr_reclaim_throttled when throttling startsi (updated patch at the end of the mail). > i.e. balance_dirty_pages() does not have an explicit wakeup - it > bases it's sleep time on the (memcg aware) measured writeback rate > on the BDI the page belongs to and the amount of outstanding dirty > data on that BDI. i.e. it estimates fairly accurately what the wait > time for this task should be given the dirty page demand and current > writeback progress being made is and just sleeps for that length of > time. > > Ideally, that's what should be happening here - we should be able to > calculate a page cleaning rate estimation and then base the sleep > time on that. No wakeups needed - when we've waited for the > estimated time, we try to reclaim again... > > In fact, why can't this "too many dirty pages" case just use the > balance_dirty_pages() infrastructure to do the "wait for writeback" > reclaim backoff? Why do we even need to re-invent the wheel here? > Conceptually I can see what you are asking for but am finding it hard to translate it into an implementation. Dirty page throttling is throttling heavy writers on a task and bdi basis but does not care about the positioning of pages on the LRU or what node the page is allocated from. On the reclaim side, the concern is how many pages that are dirty or writeback at the tail of the LRU regardless of what task dirtied that page or BDI it belongs to. Hence I'm failing to see how the same rate-limiting mechanism could be used on the reclaim side. I guess we could look at the reclaim efficiency for a given task by tracking pages that could not be reclaimed due to dirty/writeback relative to pages that could be reclaimed and sleeping for increasing lengths of time unconditionally when the reclaim efficiency is low. However it's complex and would be hard to debug. It could hit serious problems in cases where there are both fast and slow bdi's with the pages backed by a slow bdi dominating the tail of the LRU -- it could throttle excessively prematurely. Alternatively, look at taking pages that are dirty/writeback off the inactive list like what is done for LRU_UNEVICTABLE pages and throttling based on a high rate of INACTIVE_FILE:LRU_UNEVICTABLE, but again, it's complex and could incur additional penalties in the end_page_writeback due to LRU manipulations. Both are essentially re-inventing a very complex wheel. I'm aware that what I'm proposing also has its problems. It could wake prematurely because all the pages cleaned were backed by a fast bdi when the pages it scanned were backed by a slow bdi. Prehaps this could be dealt with by tracking the estimated writeback speed of pages cleaned and comparing it against the estimated writeback speed of pages at the tail of the LRU but again, the complexity may be excessive. If the first solution is too complex, it'll get hit with the KISS hammer with a request to justify the complexity when the basis for comparison is a broken concept. So I want to start simple, all it has to be is better than congestion_wait/wait_iff_congested. If that still is not good enough, the more complex options will have a basis for comparison. > > diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c > > index dae481293b5d..b9be9afa4308 100644 > > --- a/mm/filemap.c > > +++ b/mm/filemap.c > > @@ -1606,6 +1606,8 @@ void end_page_writeback(struct page *page) > > smp_mb__after_atomic(); > > wake_up_page(page, PG_writeback); > > put_page(page); > > + > > + acct_reclaim_writeback(page); > > UAF - that would need to be before the put_page() call... > UAF indeed. Here is another version of the same concept that avoids atomic updates from end_page_writeback() context and limits pgdat lookups. It's still not tested other than "it boots under kvm". diff --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h b/include/linux/backing-dev.h index ac7f231b8825..9fb1f0ae273c 100644 --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h @@ -154,7 +154,6 @@ static inline int wb_congested(struct bdi_writeback *wb, int cong_bits) } long congestion_wait(int sync, long timeout); -long wait_iff_congested(int sync, long timeout); static inline bool mapping_can_writeback(struct address_space *mapping) { diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h index 6a1d79d84675..12a011912c3c 100644 --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h @@ -199,6 +199,7 @@ enum node_stat_item { NR_VMSCAN_IMMEDIATE, /* Prioritise for reclaim when writeback ends */ NR_DIRTIED, /* page dirtyings since bootup */ NR_WRITTEN, /* page writings since bootup */ + NR_THROTTLED_WRITTEN, /* NR_WRITTEN while reclaim throttled */ NR_KERNEL_MISC_RECLAIMABLE, /* reclaimable non-slab kernel pages */ NR_FOLL_PIN_ACQUIRED, /* via: pin_user_page(), gup flag: FOLL_PIN */ NR_FOLL_PIN_RELEASED, /* pages returned via unpin_user_page() */ @@ -841,6 +842,10 @@ typedef struct pglist_data { int node_id; wait_queue_head_t kswapd_wait; wait_queue_head_t pfmemalloc_wait; + wait_queue_head_t reclaim_wait; /* wq for throttling reclaim */ + atomic_t nr_reclaim_throttled; /* nr of throtted tasks */ + unsigned long nr_reclaim_start; /* nr pages written while throttled + * when throttling started. */ struct task_struct *kswapd; /* Protected by mem_hotplug_begin/end() */ int kswapd_order; diff --git a/include/trace/events/writeback.h b/include/trace/events/writeback.h index 840d1ba84cf5..3bc759b81897 100644 --- a/include/trace/events/writeback.h +++ b/include/trace/events/writeback.h @@ -763,13 +763,6 @@ DEFINE_EVENT(writeback_congest_waited_template, writeback_congestion_wait, TP_ARGS(usec_timeout, usec_delayed) ); -DEFINE_EVENT(writeback_congest_waited_template, writeback_wait_iff_congested, - - TP_PROTO(unsigned int usec_timeout, unsigned int usec_delayed), - - TP_ARGS(usec_timeout, usec_delayed) -); - DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(writeback_single_inode_template, TP_PROTO(struct inode *inode, diff --git a/mm/backing-dev.c b/mm/backing-dev.c index 4a9d4e27d0d9..0ea1a105eae5 100644 --- a/mm/backing-dev.c +++ b/mm/backing-dev.c @@ -1041,51 +1041,3 @@ long congestion_wait(int sync, long timeout) return ret; } EXPORT_SYMBOL(congestion_wait); - -/** - * wait_iff_congested - Conditionally wait for a backing_dev to become uncongested or a pgdat to complete writes - * @sync: SYNC or ASYNC IO - * @timeout: timeout in jiffies - * - * In the event of a congested backing_dev (any backing_dev) this waits - * for up to @timeout jiffies for either a BDI to exit congestion of the - * given @sync queue or a write to complete. - * - * The return value is 0 if the sleep is for the full timeout. Otherwise, - * it is the number of jiffies that were still remaining when the function - * returned. return_value == timeout implies the function did not sleep. - */ -long wait_iff_congested(int sync, long timeout) -{ - long ret; - unsigned long start = jiffies; - DEFINE_WAIT(wait); - wait_queue_head_t *wqh = &congestion_wqh[sync]; - - /* - * If there is no congestion, yield if necessary instead - * of sleeping on the congestion queue - */ - if (atomic_read(&nr_wb_congested[sync]) == 0) { - cond_resched(); - - /* In case we scheduled, work out time remaining */ - ret = timeout - (jiffies - start); - if (ret < 0) - ret = 0; - - goto out; - } - - /* Sleep until uncongested or a write happens */ - prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); - ret = io_schedule_timeout(timeout); - finish_wait(wqh, &wait); - -out: - trace_writeback_wait_iff_congested(jiffies_to_usecs(timeout), - jiffies_to_usecs(jiffies - start)); - - return ret; -} -EXPORT_SYMBOL(wait_iff_congested); diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c index dae481293b5d..59187787fbfc 100644 --- a/mm/filemap.c +++ b/mm/filemap.c @@ -1605,6 +1605,7 @@ void end_page_writeback(struct page *page) smp_mb__after_atomic(); wake_up_page(page, PG_writeback); + acct_reclaim_writeback(page); put_page(page); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(end_page_writeback); diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h index cf3cb933eba3..cd8b892537a0 100644 --- a/mm/internal.h +++ b/mm/internal.h @@ -34,6 +34,14 @@ void page_writeback_init(void); +void __acct_reclaim_writeback(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct page *page); +static inline void acct_reclaim_writeback(struct page *page) +{ + pg_data_t *pgdat = page_pgdat(page); + if (atomic_read(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_throttled)) + __acct_reclaim_writeback(pgdat, page); +} + vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf); void free_pgtables(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *start_vma, diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c index b37435c274cf..d849ddfc1e51 100644 --- a/mm/page_alloc.c +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c @@ -7396,6 +7396,7 @@ static void __meminit pgdat_init_internals(struct pglist_data *pgdat) init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->kswapd_wait); init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait); + init_waitqueue_head(&pgdat->reclaim_wait); pgdat_page_ext_init(pgdat); lruvec_init(&pgdat->__lruvec); diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c index 74296c2d1fed..f7908ed079f7 100644 --- a/mm/vmscan.c +++ b/mm/vmscan.c @@ -1006,6 +1006,43 @@ static void handle_write_error(struct address_space *mapping, unlock_page(page); } +static void +reclaim_writeback_throttle(pg_data_t *pgdat, long timeout) +{ + wait_queue_head_t *wqh = &pgdat->reclaim_wait; + long ret; + DEFINE_WAIT(wait); + + atomic_inc(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_throttled); + WRITE_ONCE(pgdat->nr_reclaim_start, + node_page_state(pgdat, NR_THROTTLED_WRITTEN)); + + prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); + ret = schedule_timeout(timeout); + finish_wait(&pgdat->reclaim_wait, &wait); + atomic_dec(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_throttled); + + /* TODO: Add tracepoint to track time sleeping */ +} + +/* + * Account for pages written if tasks are throttled waiting on dirty + * pages to clean. If enough pages have been cleaned since throttling + * started then wakeup the throttled tasks. + */ +void __acct_reclaim_writeback(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct page *page) +{ + unsigned long nr_written; + int nr_throttled = atomic_read(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_throttled); + + __inc_node_page_state(page, NR_THROTTLED_WRITTEN); + nr_written = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_THROTTLED_WRITTEN) - + READ_ONCE(pgdat->nr_reclaim_start); + + if (nr_written > SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX * nr_throttled) + wake_up_interruptible(&pgdat->reclaim_wait); +} + /* possible outcome of pageout() */ typedef enum { /* failed to write page out, page is locked */ @@ -1412,9 +1449,8 @@ static unsigned int shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list, /* * The number of dirty pages determines if a node is marked - * reclaim_congested which affects wait_iff_congested. kswapd - * will stall and start writing pages if the tail of the LRU - * is all dirty unqueued pages. + * reclaim_congested. kswapd will stall and start writing + * pages if the tail of the LRU is all dirty unqueued pages. */ page_check_dirty_writeback(page, &dirty, &writeback); if (dirty || writeback) @@ -3180,19 +3216,20 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) * If kswapd scans pages marked for immediate * reclaim and under writeback (nr_immediate), it * implies that pages are cycling through the LRU - * faster than they are written so also forcibly stall. + * faster than they are written so forcibly stall + * until some pages complete writeback. */ if (sc->nr.immediate) - congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10); + reclaim_writeback_throttle(pgdat, HZ/10); } /* * Tag a node/memcg as congested if all the dirty pages * scanned were backed by a congested BDI and - * wait_iff_congested will stall. + * non-kswapd tasks will stall on reclaim_writeback_throttle. * * Legacy memcg will stall in page writeback so avoid forcibly - * stalling in wait_iff_congested(). + * stalling in reclaim_writeback_throttle(). */ if ((current_is_kswapd() || (cgroup_reclaim(sc) && writeback_throttling_sane(sc))) && @@ -3208,7 +3245,7 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) if (!current_is_kswapd() && current_may_throttle() && !sc->hibernation_mode && test_bit(LRUVEC_CONGESTED, &target_lruvec->flags)) - wait_iff_congested(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10); + reclaim_writeback_throttle(pgdat, HZ/10); if (should_continue_reclaim(pgdat, sc->nr_reclaimed - nr_reclaimed, sc)) @@ -4286,6 +4323,7 @@ static int kswapd(void *p) WRITE_ONCE(pgdat->kswapd_order, 0); WRITE_ONCE(pgdat->kswapd_highest_zoneidx, MAX_NR_ZONES); + atomic_set(&pgdat->nr_reclaim_throttled, 0); for ( ; ; ) { bool ret; diff --git a/mm/vmstat.c b/mm/vmstat.c index 8ce2620344b2..9b2bc9d61d4b 100644 --- a/mm/vmstat.c +++ b/mm/vmstat.c @@ -1225,6 +1225,7 @@ const char * const vmstat_text[] = { "nr_vmscan_immediate_reclaim", "nr_dirtied", "nr_written", + "nr_throttled_written", "nr_kernel_misc_reclaimable", "nr_foll_pin_acquired", "nr_foll_pin_released",
diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h index 90ff5acaf11f..52a34f5dfda2 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h @@ -3720,7 +3720,7 @@ extern int ext4_ext_map_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, struct ext4_map_blocks *map, int flags); extern int ext4_ext_truncate(handle_t *, struct inode *); extern int ext4_ext_remove_space(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t start, - ext4_lblk_t end); + ext4_lblk_t end, int nofail); extern void ext4_ext_init(struct super_block *); extern void ext4_ext_release(struct super_block *); extern long ext4_fallocate(struct file *file, int mode, loff_t offset, diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c index 6def7339056d..2bdda3b7a3e6 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c @@ -92,6 +92,12 @@ handle_t *__ext4_journal_start_sb(struct super_block *sb, unsigned int line, { journal_t *journal; int err; + gfp_t gfp_mask = GFP_NOFS; + + if (type & EXT4_EX_NOFAIL) { + gfp_mask |= __GFP_NOFAIL; + type &= ~EXT4_EX_NOFAIL; + } trace_ext4_journal_start(sb, blocks, rsv_blocks, revoke_creds, _RET_IP_); @@ -103,7 +109,7 @@ handle_t *__ext4_journal_start_sb(struct super_block *sb, unsigned int line, if (!journal || (EXT4_SB(sb)->s_mount_state & EXT4_FC_REPLAY)) return ext4_get_nojournal(); return jbd2__journal_start(journal, blocks, rsv_blocks, revoke_creds, - GFP_NOFS, type, line); + gfp_mask, type, line); } int __ext4_journal_stop(const char *where, unsigned int line, handle_t *handle) diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c index c0de30f25185..b7bc12aedf78 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c @@ -1488,7 +1488,7 @@ static int ext4_ext_search_left(struct inode *inode, static int ext4_ext_search_right(struct inode *inode, struct ext4_ext_path *path, ext4_lblk_t *logical, ext4_fsblk_t *phys, - struct ext4_extent *ret_ex) + struct ext4_extent *ret_ex, int nofail) { struct buffer_head *bh = NULL; struct ext4_extent_header *eh; @@ -1565,7 +1565,7 @@ static int ext4_ext_search_right(struct inode *inode, while (++depth < path->p_depth) { /* subtract from p_depth to get proper eh_depth */ bh = read_extent_tree_block(inode, block, - path->p_depth - depth, 0); + path->p_depth - depth, nofail); if (IS_ERR(bh)) return PTR_ERR(bh); eh = ext_block_hdr(bh); @@ -1574,7 +1574,7 @@ static int ext4_ext_search_right(struct inode *inode, put_bh(bh); } - bh = read_extent_tree_block(inode, block, path->p_depth - depth, 0); + bh = read_extent_tree_block(inode, block, path->p_depth - depth, nofail); if (IS_ERR(bh)) return PTR_ERR(bh); eh = ext_block_hdr(bh); @@ -2773,7 +2773,7 @@ ext4_ext_more_to_rm(struct ext4_ext_path *path) } int ext4_ext_remove_space(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t start, - ext4_lblk_t end) + ext4_lblk_t end, int nofail) { struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb); int depth = ext_depth(inode); @@ -2789,7 +2789,8 @@ int ext4_ext_remove_space(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t start, ext_debug(inode, "truncate since %u to %u\n", start, end); /* probably first extent we're gonna free will be last in block */ - handle = ext4_journal_start_with_revoke(inode, EXT4_HT_TRUNCATE, + handle = ext4_journal_start_with_revoke(inode, + EXT4_HT_TRUNCATE | nofail, depth + 1, ext4_free_metadata_revoke_credits(inode->i_sb, depth)); if (IS_ERR(handle)) @@ -2877,7 +2878,7 @@ int ext4_ext_remove_space(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t start, */ lblk = ex_end + 1; err = ext4_ext_search_right(inode, path, &lblk, &pblk, - NULL); + NULL, nofail); if (err < 0) goto out; if (pblk) { @@ -2899,10 +2900,6 @@ int ext4_ext_remove_space(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t start, } else { path = kcalloc(depth + 1, sizeof(struct ext4_ext_path), GFP_NOFS | __GFP_NOFAIL); - if (path == NULL) { - ext4_journal_stop(handle); - return -ENOMEM; - } path[0].p_maxdepth = path[0].p_depth = depth; path[0].p_hdr = ext_inode_hdr(inode); i = 0; @@ -2955,7 +2952,7 @@ int ext4_ext_remove_space(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t start, memset(path + i + 1, 0, sizeof(*path)); bh = read_extent_tree_block(inode, ext4_idx_pblock(path[i].p_idx), depth - i - 1, - EXT4_EX_NOCACHE); + EXT4_EX_NOCACHE | nofail); if (IS_ERR(bh)) { /* should we reset i_size? */ err = PTR_ERR(bh); @@ -4186,7 +4183,7 @@ int ext4_ext_map_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, if (err) goto out; ar.lright = map->m_lblk; - err = ext4_ext_search_right(inode, path, &ar.lright, &ar.pright, &ex2); + err = ext4_ext_search_right(inode, path, &ar.lright, &ar.pright, &ex2, 0); if (err < 0) goto out; @@ -4368,23 +4365,13 @@ int ext4_ext_truncate(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode) last_block = (inode->i_size + sb->s_blocksize - 1) >> EXT4_BLOCK_SIZE_BITS(sb); -retry: err = ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, last_block, - EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - last_block); - if (err == -ENOMEM) { - cond_resched(); - congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/50); - goto retry; - } + EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - last_block, + EXT4_EX_NOFAIL); if (err) return err; -retry_remove_space: - err = ext4_ext_remove_space(inode, last_block, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - 1); - if (err == -ENOMEM) { - cond_resched(); - congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/50); - goto retry_remove_space; - } + err = ext4_ext_remove_space(inode, last_block, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - 1, + EXT4_EX_NOFAIL); return err; } @@ -5322,13 +5309,13 @@ static int ext4_collapse_range(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t len) ext4_discard_preallocations(inode, 0); ret = ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, punch_start, - EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - punch_start); + EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - punch_start, 0); if (ret) { up_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem); goto out_stop; } - ret = ext4_ext_remove_space(inode, punch_start, punch_stop - 1); + ret = ext4_ext_remove_space(inode, punch_start, punch_stop - 1, 0); if (ret) { up_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem); goto out_stop; @@ -5510,7 +5497,7 @@ static int ext4_insert_range(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t len) } ret = ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, offset_lblk, - EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - offset_lblk); + EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - offset_lblk, 0); if (ret) { up_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem); goto out_stop; @@ -5574,10 +5561,10 @@ ext4_swap_extents(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode1, BUG_ON(!inode_is_locked(inode1)); BUG_ON(!inode_is_locked(inode2)); - *erp = ext4_es_remove_extent(inode1, lblk1, count); + *erp = ext4_es_remove_extent(inode1, lblk1, count, 0); if (unlikely(*erp)) return 0; - *erp = ext4_es_remove_extent(inode2, lblk2, count); + *erp = ext4_es_remove_extent(inode2, lblk2, count, 0); if (unlikely(*erp)) return 0; diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c index 9a3a8996aacf..7f7711a2ea44 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c +++ b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c @@ -144,9 +144,10 @@ static struct kmem_cache *ext4_es_cachep; static struct kmem_cache *ext4_pending_cachep; -static int __es_insert_extent(struct inode *inode, struct extent_status *newes); +static int __es_insert_extent(struct inode *inode, struct extent_status *newes, + int nofail); static int __es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, - ext4_lblk_t end, int *reserved); + ext4_lblk_t end, int *reserved, int nofail); static int es_reclaim_extents(struct ext4_inode_info *ei, int *nr_to_scan); static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan, struct ext4_inode_info *locked_ei); @@ -452,10 +453,11 @@ static void ext4_es_list_del(struct inode *inode) static struct extent_status * ext4_es_alloc_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, ext4_lblk_t len, - ext4_fsblk_t pblk) + ext4_fsblk_t pblk, int nofail) { struct extent_status *es; - es = kmem_cache_alloc(ext4_es_cachep, GFP_ATOMIC); + es = kmem_cache_alloc(ext4_es_cachep, + GFP_ATOMIC | (nofail ? __GFP_NOFAIL : 0)); if (es == NULL) return NULL; es->es_lblk = lblk; @@ -754,7 +756,8 @@ static inline void ext4_es_insert_extent_check(struct inode *inode, } #endif -static int __es_insert_extent(struct inode *inode, struct extent_status *newes) +static int __es_insert_extent(struct inode *inode, struct extent_status *newes, + int nofail) { struct ext4_es_tree *tree = &EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_tree; struct rb_node **p = &tree->root.rb_node; @@ -795,7 +798,7 @@ static int __es_insert_extent(struct inode *inode, struct extent_status *newes) } es = ext4_es_alloc_extent(inode, newes->es_lblk, newes->es_len, - newes->es_pblk); + newes->es_pblk, nofail); if (!es) return -ENOMEM; rb_link_node(&es->rb_node, parent, p); @@ -848,11 +851,11 @@ int ext4_es_insert_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, ext4_es_insert_extent_check(inode, &newes); write_lock(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_lock); - err = __es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, end, NULL); + err = __es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, end, NULL, 0); if (err != 0) goto error; retry: - err = __es_insert_extent(inode, &newes); + err = __es_insert_extent(inode, &newes, 0); if (err == -ENOMEM && __es_shrink(EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb), 128, EXT4_I(inode))) goto retry; @@ -902,7 +905,7 @@ void ext4_es_cache_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, es = __es_tree_search(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_tree.root, lblk); if (!es || es->es_lblk > end) - __es_insert_extent(inode, &newes); + __es_insert_extent(inode, &newes, 0); write_unlock(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_lock); } @@ -1294,6 +1297,7 @@ static unsigned int get_rsvd(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t end, * @lblk - first block in range * @end - last block in range * @reserved - number of cluster reservations released + * @nofail - EXT4_EX_NOFAIL if __GFP_NOFAIL should be used * * If @reserved is not NULL and delayed allocation is enabled, counts * block/cluster reservations freed by removing range and if bigalloc @@ -1301,7 +1305,7 @@ static unsigned int get_rsvd(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t end, * error code on failure. */ static int __es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, - ext4_lblk_t end, int *reserved) + ext4_lblk_t end, int *reserved, int nofail) { struct ext4_es_tree *tree = &EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_tree; struct rb_node *node; @@ -1350,7 +1354,7 @@ static int __es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, orig_es.es_len - len2; ext4_es_store_pblock_status(&newes, block, ext4_es_status(&orig_es)); - err = __es_insert_extent(inode, &newes); + err = __es_insert_extent(inode, &newes, nofail); if (err) { es->es_lblk = orig_es.es_lblk; es->es_len = orig_es.es_len; @@ -1426,12 +1430,13 @@ static int __es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, * @inode - file containing range * @lblk - first block in range * @len - number of blocks to remove + * @nofail - EXT4_EX_NOFAIL if __GFP_NOFAIL should be used * * Reduces block/cluster reservation count and for bigalloc cancels pending * reservations as needed. Returns 0 on success, error code on failure. */ int ext4_es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, - ext4_lblk_t len) + ext4_lblk_t len, int nofail) { ext4_lblk_t end; int err = 0; @@ -1456,7 +1461,7 @@ int ext4_es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, * is reclaimed. */ write_lock(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_lock); - err = __es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, end, &reserved); + err = __es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, end, &reserved, nofail); write_unlock(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_lock); ext4_es_print_tree(inode); ext4_da_release_space(inode, reserved); @@ -2003,11 +2008,11 @@ int ext4_es_insert_delayed_block(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, write_lock(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_lock); - err = __es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, lblk, NULL); + err = __es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, lblk, NULL, 0); if (err != 0) goto error; retry: - err = __es_insert_extent(inode, &newes); + err = __es_insert_extent(inode, &newes, 0); if (err == -ENOMEM && __es_shrink(EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb), 128, EXT4_I(inode))) goto retry; diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents_status.h b/fs/ext4/extents_status.h index 4ec30a798260..23d77094a165 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/extents_status.h +++ b/fs/ext4/extents_status.h @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ extern void ext4_es_cache_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, ext4_lblk_t len, ext4_fsblk_t pblk, unsigned int status); extern int ext4_es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, - ext4_lblk_t len); + ext4_lblk_t len, int nofail); extern void ext4_es_find_extent_range(struct inode *inode, int (*match_fn)(struct extent_status *es), ext4_lblk_t lblk, ext4_lblk_t end, diff --git a/fs/ext4/indirect.c b/fs/ext4/indirect.c index 89efa78ed4b2..910e87aea7be 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/indirect.c +++ b/fs/ext4/indirect.c @@ -1125,7 +1125,7 @@ void ext4_ind_truncate(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode) return; } - ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, last_block, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - last_block); + ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, last_block, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS - last_block, 0); /* * The orphan list entry will now protect us from any crash which diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c index d18852d6029c..24246043d94b 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c @@ -1575,7 +1575,7 @@ static void mpage_release_unused_pages(struct mpage_da_data *mpd, ext4_lblk_t start, last; start = index << (PAGE_SHIFT - inode->i_blkbits); last = end << (PAGE_SHIFT - inode->i_blkbits); - ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, start, last - start + 1); + ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, start, last - start + 1, 0); } pagevec_init(&pvec); @@ -4109,7 +4109,7 @@ int ext4_punch_hole(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length) ext4_discard_preallocations(inode, 0); ret = ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, first_block, - stop_block - first_block); + stop_block - first_block, 0); if (ret) { up_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem); goto out_stop; @@ -4117,7 +4117,7 @@ int ext4_punch_hole(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length) if (ext4_test_inode_flag(inode, EXT4_INODE_EXTENTS)) ret = ext4_ext_remove_space(inode, first_block, - stop_block - 1); + stop_block - 1, 0); else ret = ext4_ind_remove_space(handle, inode, first_block, stop_block); diff --git a/fs/ext4/ioctl.c b/fs/ext4/ioctl.c index 606dee9e08a3..e4de05a6b976 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/ioctl.c +++ b/fs/ext4/ioctl.c @@ -79,8 +79,8 @@ static void swap_inode_data(struct inode *inode1, struct inode *inode2) (ei1->i_flags & ~EXT4_FL_SHOULD_SWAP); ei2->i_flags = tmp | (ei2->i_flags & ~EXT4_FL_SHOULD_SWAP); swap(ei1->i_disksize, ei2->i_disksize); - ext4_es_remove_extent(inode1, 0, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS); - ext4_es_remove_extent(inode2, 0, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS); + ext4_es_remove_extent(inode1, 0, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS, 0); + ext4_es_remove_extent(inode2, 0, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS, 0); isize = i_size_read(inode1); i_size_write(inode1, i_size_read(inode2)); diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c index 0775950ee84e..947e8376a35a 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/super.c +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c @@ -1393,7 +1393,7 @@ void ext4_clear_inode(struct inode *inode) invalidate_inode_buffers(inode); clear_inode(inode); ext4_discard_preallocations(inode, 0); - ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, 0, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS); + ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, 0, EXT_MAX_BLOCKS, 0); dquot_drop(inode); if (EXT4_I(inode)->jinode) { jbd2_journal_release_jbd_inode(EXT4_JOURNAL(inode), diff --git a/fs/jbd2/transaction.c b/fs/jbd2/transaction.c index 6a3caedd2285..23e0f003d43b 100644 --- a/fs/jbd2/transaction.c +++ b/fs/jbd2/transaction.c @@ -476,9 +476,9 @@ static int start_this_handle(journal_t *journal, handle_t *handle, } /* Allocate a new handle. This should probably be in a slab... */ -static handle_t *new_handle(int nblocks) +static handle_t *new_handle(int nblocks, gfp_t gfp) { - handle_t *handle = jbd2_alloc_handle(GFP_NOFS); + handle_t *handle = jbd2_alloc_handle(gfp); if (!handle) return NULL; handle->h_total_credits = nblocks; @@ -505,13 +505,13 @@ handle_t *jbd2__journal_start(journal_t *journal, int nblocks, int rsv_blocks, nblocks += DIV_ROUND_UP(revoke_records, journal->j_revoke_records_per_block); - handle = new_handle(nblocks); + handle = new_handle(nblocks, gfp_mask); if (!handle) return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); if (rsv_blocks) { handle_t *rsv_handle; - rsv_handle = new_handle(rsv_blocks); + rsv_handle = new_handle(rsv_blocks, gfp_mask); if (!rsv_handle) { jbd2_free_handle(handle); return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
Indefinite loops waiting for memory allocation are discouraged by documentation in gfp.h which says the use of __GFP_NOFAIL that it is definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless loop around allocator. Such loops that use congestion_wait() are particularly unwise as congestion_wait() is indistinguishable from schedule_timeout_uninterruptible() in practice - and should be deprecated. So this patch changes the two loops in ext4_ext_truncate() to use __GFP_NOFAIL instead of looping. As the allocation is multiple layers deeper in the call stack, this requires passing the EXT4_EX_NOFAIL flag down and handling it in various places. Of particular interest is the ext4_journal_start family of calls which can now have EXT4_EX_NOFAIL 'or'ed in to the 'type'. This could be seen as a blurring of types. However 'type' is 8 bits, and EXT4_EX_NOFAIL is a high bit, so it is safe in practice. jbd2__journal_start() is enhanced so that the gfp_t flags passed are used for *all* allocations. Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> --- fs/ext4/ext4.h | 2 +- fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c | 8 +++++++- fs/ext4/extents.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++----------------------------- fs/ext4/extents_status.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++-------------- fs/ext4/extents_status.h | 2 +- fs/ext4/indirect.c | 2 +- fs/ext4/inode.c | 6 +++--- fs/ext4/ioctl.c | 4 ++-- fs/ext4/super.c | 2 +- fs/jbd2/transaction.c | 8 ++++---- 10 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-)