| Message ID | 20200604074606.266213-18-david@fromorbit.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | xfs: rework inode flushing to make inode reclaim fully asynchronous | expand |
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 05:45:53PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> > > Now that dirty inode writeback doesn't cause read-modify-write > cycles on the inode cluster buffer under memory pressure, the need > to throttle memory reclaim to the rate at which we can clean dirty > inodes goes away. That is due to the fact that we no longer thrash > inode cluster buffers under memory pressure to clean dirty inodes. > > This means inode writeback no longer stalls on memory allocation > or read IO, and hence can be done asynchronously without generating > memory pressure. As a result, blocking inode writeback in reclaim is > no longer necessary to prevent reclaim priority windup as cleaning > dirty inodes is no longer dependent on having memory reserves > available for the filesystem to make progress reclaiming inodes. > > Hence we can convert inode reclaim to be non-blocking for shrinker > callouts, both for direct reclaim and kswapd. > > On a vanilla kernel, running a 16-way fsmark create workload on a > 4 node/16p/16GB RAM machine, I can reliably pin 14.75GB of RAM via > userspace mlock(). The OOM killer gets invoked at 15GB of > pinned RAM. > > With this patch alone, pinning memory triggers premature OOM > killer invocation, sometimes with as much as 45% of RAM being free. > It's trivially easy to trigger the OOM killer when reclaim does not > block. > Nit, but I had to reread this a couple times to grok what "With this patch alone ..." meant. I think it means "With non-blocking inode reclaim without cluster buffer pinning ...," based on the next paragraph. If so, I think the explicit wording is a little more clear. > With pinning inode clusters in RAM and then adding this patch, I can > reliably pin 14.5GB of RAM and still have the fsmark workload run to > completion. The OOM killer gets invoked 14.75GB of pinned RAM, which > is only a small amount of memory less than the vanilla kernel. It is > much more reliable than just with async reclaim alone. > > simoops shows that allocation stalls go away when async reclaim is > used. Vanilla kernel: > > Run time: 1924 seconds > Read latency (p50: 3,305,472) (p95: 3,723,264) (p99: 4,001,792) > Write latency (p50: 184,064) (p95: 553,984) (p99: 807,936) > Allocation latency (p50: 2,641,920) (p95: 3,911,680) (p99: 4,464,640) > work rate = 13.45/sec (avg 13.44/sec) (p50: 13.46) (p95: 13.58) (p99: 13.70) > alloc stall rate = 3.80/sec (avg: 2.59) (p50: 2.54) (p95: 2.96) (p99: 3.02) > > With inode cluster pinning and async reclaim: > > Run time: 1924 seconds > Read latency (p50: 3,305,472) (p95: 3,715,072) (p99: 3,977,216) > Write latency (p50: 187,648) (p95: 553,984) (p99: 789,504) > Allocation latency (p50: 2,748,416) (p95: 3,919,872) (p99: 4,448,256) > work rate = 13.28/sec (avg 13.32/sec) (p50: 13.26) (p95: 13.34) (p99: 13.34) > alloc stall rate = 0.02/sec (avg: 0.02) (p50: 0.01) (p95: 0.03) (p99: 0.03) > > Latencies don't really change much, nor does the work rate. However, > allocation almost never stalls with these changes, whilst the > vanilla kernel is sometimes reporting 20 stalls/s over a 60s sample > period. This difference is due to inode reclaim being largely > non-blocking now. > > IOWs, once we have pinned inode cluster buffers, we can make inode > reclaim non-blocking without a major risk of premature and/or > spurious OOM killer invocation, and without any changes to memory > reclaim infrastructure. > Very interesting result: Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> > Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c > index dbba4c1946386..a6780942034fc 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c > @@ -1402,7 +1402,7 @@ xfs_reclaim_inodes_nr( > xfs_reclaim_work_queue(mp); > xfs_ail_push_all(mp->m_ail); > > - return xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag(mp, SYNC_TRYLOCK | SYNC_WAIT, &nr_to_scan); > + return xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag(mp, SYNC_TRYLOCK, &nr_to_scan); > } > > /* > -- > 2.26.2.761.g0e0b3e54be >
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c index dbba4c1946386..a6780942034fc 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c @@ -1402,7 +1402,7 @@ xfs_reclaim_inodes_nr( xfs_reclaim_work_queue(mp); xfs_ail_push_all(mp->m_ail); - return xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag(mp, SYNC_TRYLOCK | SYNC_WAIT, &nr_to_scan); + return xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag(mp, SYNC_TRYLOCK, &nr_to_scan); } /*