LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] split file and anonymous page queues #3
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 18:29:15 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <17921.20299.7899.527765@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46011EF6.3040704@redhat.com>
Rik van Riel writes:
> Rik van Riel wrote:
> > Nikita Danilov wrote:
> >
> >> Probably I am missing something, but I don't see how that can help. For
> >> example, suppose (for simplicity) that we have swappiness of 100%, and
> >> that fraction of referenced anon pages gets slightly less than of file
> >> pages. get_scan_ratio() increases anon_percent, and shrink_zone() starts
> >> scanning anon queue more aggressively. As a result, pages spend less
> >> time there, and have less chance of ever being accessed, reducing
> >> fraction of referenced anon pages further, and triggering further
> >> increase in the amount of scanning, etc. Doesn't this introduce positive
> >> feed-back loop?
> >
> > It's a possibility, but I don't think it will be much of an
> > issue in practice.
> >
> > If it is, we can always use refaults as a correcting
> > mechanism - which would have the added benefit of being
> > able to do streaming IO without putting any pressure on
> > the active list, essentially clock-pro replacement with
> > just some tweaks to shrink_list()...
>
> As an aside, due to the use-once algorithm file pages are at a
> natural disadvantage already. I believe it would be really
> hard to construct a workload where anon pages suffer the positive
> feedback loop you describe...
That scenario works for file queues too. Of course, all this is but a
theoretical speculation at this point, but I am concerned that
- that loop would tend to happen under various border conditions,
making it hard to isolate, diagnose, and debug, and
- long before it becomes explicitly visible (say, as an excessive cpu
consumption by scanner), it would ruin global lru ordering, degrading
overall performance.
Generally speaking, multi-queue replacement mechanisms were tried in the
past, and they all suffer from the common drawback: once scanning rate
is different for different queues, so is the notion of "hotness",
measured by scanner. As a result multi-queue scanner fails to capture
working set properly.
Nikita.
>
> --
> Politics is the struggle between those who want to make their country
> the best in the world, and those who believe it already is. Each group
> calls the other unpatriotic.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-21 15:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-20 22:08 Rik van Riel
2007-03-21 1:07 ` Matt Mackall
2007-03-21 19:11 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-21 8:44 ` Nikita Danilov
2007-03-21 11:24 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-21 11:48 ` Nikita Danilov
2007-03-21 12:01 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-21 12:03 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-21 15:29 ` Nikita Danilov [this message]
2007-03-21 16:08 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-21 22:18 ` Nikita Danilov
2007-03-21 16:12 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-03-21 16:56 ` Rik van Riel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-03-20 22:06 Rik van Riel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=17921.20299.7899.527765@gargle.gargle.HOWL \
--to=nikita@clusterfs.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--subject='Re: [RFC][PATCH] split file and anonymous page queues #3' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).