Re: [PATCH 07/13] writeback: explicit low bound for vm.dirty_ratio

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Wu Fengguang
Date: Friday, August 6, 2010 - 5:44 am

On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 07:34:01AM +0800, Andrew Morton wrote:

Yeah, fixed below.


Right.
         # echo 111 > /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio
         echo: write error: invalid argument


Looks like a serious problem. I'm now much more reserved on pushing
this patch :)


Good point. Here is the patch with updated changelog.

Thanks,
Fengguang
---
Subject: writeback: explicit low bound for vm.dirty_ratio
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Date: Thu Jul 15 10:28:57 CST 2010

Force a user visible low bound of 5% for the vm.dirty_ratio interface.

This is an interface change. When doing

	echo N > /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio

where N < 5, the old behavior is pretend to accept the value, while
the new behavior is to reject it explicitly with -EINVAL.  This will
possibly break user space if they checks the return value.

Currently global_dirty_limits() applies a low bound of 5% for
vm_dirty_ratio.  This is not very user visible -- if the user sets
vm.dirty_ratio=1, the operation seems to succeed but will be rounded up
to 5% when used.

Another problem is inconsistency: calc_period_shift() uses the plain
vm_dirty_ratio value, which may be a problem when vm.dirty_ratio is set
to < 5 by the user.

CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
---
 kernel/sysctl.c     |    3 ++-
 mm/page-writeback.c |   10 ++--------
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

--- linux-next.orig/kernel/sysctl.c	2010-08-05 22:48:34.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-next/kernel/sysctl.c	2010-08-05 22:48:47.000000000 +0800
@@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ static int ten_thousand = 10000;
 
 /* this is needed for the proc_doulongvec_minmax of vm_dirty_bytes */
 static unsigned long dirty_bytes_min = 2 * PAGE_SIZE;
+static int dirty_ratio_min = 5;
 
 /* this is needed for the proc_dointvec_minmax for [fs_]overflow UID and GID */
 static int maxolduid = 65535;
@@ -1031,7 +1032,7 @@ static struct ctl_table vm_table[] = {
 		.maxlen		= sizeof(vm_dirty_ratio),
 		.mode		= 0644,
 		.proc_handler	= dirty_ratio_handler,
-		.extra1		= &zero,
+		.extra1		= &dirty_ratio_min,
 		.extra2		= &one_hundred,
 	},
 	{
--- linux-next.orig/mm/page-writeback.c	2010-08-05 22:48:42.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-next/mm/page-writeback.c	2010-08-05 22:48:47.000000000 +0800
@@ -415,14 +415,8 @@ void global_dirty_limits(unsigned long *
 
 	if (vm_dirty_bytes)
 		dirty = DIV_ROUND_UP(vm_dirty_bytes, PAGE_SIZE);
-	else {
-		int dirty_ratio;
-
-		dirty_ratio = vm_dirty_ratio;
-		if (dirty_ratio < 5)
-			dirty_ratio = 5;
-		dirty = (dirty_ratio * available_memory) / 100;
-	}
+	else
+		dirty = (vm_dirty_ratio * available_memory) / 100;
 
 	if (dirty_background_bytes)
 		background = DIV_ROUND_UP(dirty_background_bytes, PAGE_SIZE);
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH 00/13] writeback patches for 2.6.36, Wu Fengguang, (Thu Aug 5, 9:10 am)
Re: [PATCH 00/13] writeback patches for 2.6.36, Andrew Morton, (Thu Aug 5, 4:08 pm)
Re: [PATCH 07/13] writeback: explicit low bound for vm.dir ..., Wu Fengguang, (Fri Aug 6, 5:44 am)