Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030533AbVKPWXe (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:23:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030532AbVKPWXd (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:23:33 -0500 Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.130.16]:21953 "EHLO pat.uio.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030539AbVKPWXd (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:23:33 -0500 Subject: Re: mmap over nfs leads to excessive system load From: Trond Myklebust To: Andrew Morton Cc: theonetruekenny@yahoo.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20051116141052.7994ab7d.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20051116150141.29549.qmail@web34113.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1132163057.8811.15.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20051116100053.44d81ae2.akpm@osdl.org> <1132166062.8811.30.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20051116110938.1bf54339.akpm@osdl.org> <1132171500.8811.37.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20051116133130.625cd19b.akpm@osdl.org> <1132177785.8811.57.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20051116141052.7994ab7d.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:23:16 -0500 Message-Id: <1132179796.8811.70.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-3.959, required 12, autolearn=disabled, AWL 1.04, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL -5.00) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1344 Lines: 34 On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 14:10 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > How is the filesystem supposed to distinguish between the cases > > "VM->writepage()", and "VM->writepages->mpage_writepages->writepage()"? > > > > Via the writeback_control, hopefully. > > For write_one_page(), sync_mode==WB_SYNC_ALL, so NFS should start the I/O > immediately (it appears to not do so). Sorry, but so does filemap_fdatawrite(). WB_SYNC_ALL clearly does not discriminate between a writepages() and a single writepage() situation, whatever the original intention was. > For vmscan->writepage, wbc->for_reclaim is set, so we know that the IO > should be pushed immediately. nfs_writepage() seems to dtrt here. > > With the proposed changes, we don't need that iput() in nfs_writepage(). > That worries me because I recall from a couple of years back that there are > really subtle races with doing iput() on the vmscan->writepage() path. > Cannot remember what they were though... Possibly to do with block filesystems that may trigger ->writepage() while inside iput_final()? NFS can't do that. Cheers, Trond - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/