+81
−44
Loading
writeback: max, min and target dirty pause time
Control the pause time and the call intervals to balance_dirty_pages()
with three parameters:
1) max_pause, limited by bdi_dirty and MAX_PAUSE
2) the target pause time, grows with the number of dd tasks
and is normally limited by max_pause/2
3) the minimal pause, set to half the target pause
and is used to skip short sleeps and accumulate them into bigger ones
The typical behaviors after patch:
- if ever task_ratelimit is far below dirty_ratelimit, the pause time
will remain constant at max_pause and nr_dirtied_pause will be
fluctuating with task_ratelimit
- in the normal cases, nr_dirtied_pause will remain stable (keep in the
same pace with dirty_ratelimit) and the pause time will be fluctuating
with task_ratelimit
In summary, someone has to fluctuate with task_ratelimit, because
task_ratelimit = nr_dirtied_pause / pause
We normally prefer a stable nr_dirtied_pause, until reaching max_pause.
The notable behavior changes are:
- in stable workloads, there will no longer be sudden big trajectory
switching of nr_dirtied_pause as concerned by Peter. It will be as
smooth as dirty_ratelimit and changing proportionally with it (as
always, assuming bdi bandwidth does not fluctuate across 2^N lines,
otherwise nr_dirtied_pause will show up in 2+ parallel trajectories)
- in the rare cases when something keeps task_ratelimit far below
dirty_ratelimit, the smoothness can no longer be retained and
nr_dirtied_pause will be "dancing" with task_ratelimit. This fixes a
(not that destructive but still not good) bug that
dirty_ratelimit gets brought down undesirably
<= balanced_dirty_ratelimit is under estimated
<= weakly executed task_ratelimit
<= pause goes too large and gets trimmed down to max_pause
<= nr_dirtied_pause (based on dirty_ratelimit) is set too large
<= dirty_ratelimit being much larger than task_ratelimit
- introduce min_pause to avoid small pause sleeps
- when pause is trimmed down to max_pause, try to compensate it at the
next pause time
The "refactor" type of changes are:
The max_pause equation is slightly transformed to make it slightly more
efficient.
We now scale target_pause by (N * 10ms) on 2^N concurrent tasks, which
is effectively equal to the original scaling max_pause by (N * 20ms)
because the original code does implicit target_pause ~= max_pause / 2.
Based on the same implicit ratio, target_pause starts with 10ms on 1 dd.
CC: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: 
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>