[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "mm: don't reclaim inodes with many attached pages"
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 12:21:07PM +0000, Chris Mason wrote:
> On 29 Jan 2019, at 23:17, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <>
> >
> > This reverts commit a76cf1a474d7dbcd9336b5f5afb0162baa142cf0.
> >
> > This change causes serious changes to page cache and inode cache
> > behaviour and balance, resulting in major performance regressions
> > when combining worklaods such as large file copies and kernel
> > compiles.
> >
> >
> I'm a little confused by the latest comment in the bz:

Which says the first patch that changed the shrinker behaviour is
the underlying cause of the regression.

> Are these reverts sufficient?

I think so.

> Roman beat me to suggesting Rik's followup. We hit a different problem
> in prod with small slabs, and have a lot of instrumentation on Rik's
> code helping.

I think that's just another nasty, expedient hack that doesn't solve
the underlying problem. Solving the underlying problem does not
require changing core reclaim algorithms and upsetting a page
reclaim/shrinker balance that has been stable and worked well for
just about everyone for years.


Dave Chinner

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-31 02:35    [W:0.111 / U:2.884 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site