Fixed camera record + voice record from mic. + small restore.
Revert "mm: avoid waking kswapd for THP allocations when compaction is deferred or contended"

This reverts commit 782fd30406ecb9d9b082816abe0c6008fc72a7b0.

We are going to reinstate the __GFP_NO_KSWAPD flag that has been
removed, the removal reverted, and then removed again.  Making this
commit a pointless fixup for a problem that was caused by the removal of
__GFP_NO_KSWAPD flag.

The thing is, we really don't want to wake up kswapd for THP allocations
(because they fail quite commonly under any kind of memory pressure,
including when there is tons of memory free), and these patches were
just trying to fix up the underlying bug: the original removal of
__GFP_NO_KSWAPD in commit c654345924f7 ("mm: remove __GFP_NO_KSWAPD")
was simply bogus.

Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Revert "revert "Revert "mm: remove __GFP_NO_KSWAPD""" and associated damage

This reverts commits a50915394f1fc02c2861d3b7ce7014788aa5066e and
d7c3b937bdf45f0b844400b7bf6fd3ed50bac604.

This is a revert of a revert of a revert.  In addition, it reverts the
even older i915 change to stop using the __GFP_NO_KSWAPD flag due to the
original commits in linux-next.

It turns out that the original patch really was bogus, and that the
original revert was the correct thing to do after all.  We thought we
had fixed the problem, and then reverted the revert, but the problem
really is fundamental: waking up kswapd simply isn't the right thing to
do, and direct reclaim sometimes simply _is_ the right thing to do.

When certain allocations fail, we simply should try some direct reclaim,
and if that fails, fail the allocation.  That's the right thing to do
for THP allocations, which can easily fail, and the GPU allocations want
to do that too.

So starting kswapd is sometimes simply wrong, and removing the flag that
said "don't start kswapd" was a mistake.  Let's hope we never revisit
this mistake again - and certainly not this many times ;)

Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
mm: dmapool: use provided gfp flags for all dma_alloc_coherent() calls

dmapool always calls dma_alloc_coherent() with GFP_ATOMIC flag,
regardless the flags provided by the caller. This causes excessive
pruning of emergency memory pools without any good reason. Additionaly,
on ARM architecture any driver which is using dmapools will sooner or
later  trigger the following error:
"ERROR: 256 KiB atomic DMA coherent pool is too small!
Please increase it with coherent_pool= kernel parameter!".
Increasing the coherent pool size usually doesn't help much and only
delays such error, because all GFP_ATOMIC DMA allocations are always
served from the special, very limited memory pool.

This patch changes the dmapool code to correctly use gfp flags provided
by the dmapool caller.

Reported-by: Soeren Moch <smoch@web.de>
Reported-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Tested-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Tested-by: Soeren Moch <smoch@web.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
mm/page-writeback.c: document bdi_min_ratio

Looks like someone got distracted after adding the comment characters.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
writeback: fix uninitialized task_ratelimit

In balance_dirty_pages() task_ratelimit may be not initialized
(initialization skiped by goto pause), and then used when calling
tracing hook.

Fix it by moving the task_ratelimit assignment before goto pause.

Reported-by: Witold Baryluk <baryluk@smp.if.uj.edu.pl>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: hard throttle 1000+ dd on a slow USB stick

The sleep based balance_dirty_pages() can pause at most MAX_PAUSE=200ms
on every 1 4KB-page, which means it cannot throttle a task under
4KB/200ms=20KB/s. So when there are more than 512 dd writing to a
10MB/s USB stick, its bdi dirty pages could grow out of control.

Even if we can increase MAX_PAUSE, the minimal (task_ratelimit = 1)
means a limit of 4KB/s.

They can eventually be safeguarded by the global limit check
(nr_dirty < dirty_thresh). However if someone is also writing to an
HDD at the same time, it'll get poor HDD write performance.

We at least want to maintain good write performance for other devices
when one device is attacked by some "massive parallel" workload, or
suffers from slow write bandwidth, or somehow get stalled due to some
error condition (eg. NFS server not responding).

For a stalled device, we need to completely block its dirtiers, too,
before its bdi dirty pages grow all the way up to the global limit and
leave no space for the other functional devices.

So change the loop exit condition to

	/*
	 * Always enforce global dirty limit; also enforce bdi dirty limit
	 * if the normal max_pause sleeps cannot keep things under control.
	 */
	if (nr_dirty < dirty_thresh &&
	    (bdi_dirty < bdi_thresh || bdi->dirty_ratelimit > 1))
		break;

which can be further simplified to

	if (task_ratelimit)
		break;

Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: remove vm_dirties and task->dirties

They are not used any more.

Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: comment on the bdi dirty threshold

We do "floating proportions" to let active devices to grow its target
share of dirty pages and stalled/inactive devices to decrease its target
share over time.

It works well except in the case of "an inactive disk suddenly goes
busy", where the initial target share may be too small. To mitigate
this, bdi_position_ratio() has the below line to raise a small
bdi_thresh when it's safe to do so, so that the disk be feed with enough
dirty pages for efficient IO and in turn fast rampup of bdi_thresh:

        bdi_thresh = max(bdi_thresh, (limit - dirty) / 8);

balance_dirty_pages() normally does negative feedback control which
adjusts ratelimit to balance the bdi dirty pages around the target.
In some extreme cases when that is not enough, it will have to block
the tasks completely until the bdi dirty pages drop below bdi_thresh.

Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: permit through good bdi even when global dirty exceeded

On a system with 1 local mount and 1 NFS mount, if the NFS server
becomes not responding when dd to the NFS mount, the NFS dirty pages may
exceed the global dirty limit and _every_ task involving writing will be
blocked. The whole system appears unresponsive.

The workaround is to permit through the bdi's that only has a small
number of dirty pages. The number chosen (bdi_stat_error pages) is not
enough to enable the local disk to run in optimal throughput, however is
enough to make the system responsive on a broken NFS mount. The user can
then kill the dirtiers on the NFS mount and increase the global dirty
limit to bring up the local disk's throughput.

It risks allowing dirty pages to grow much larger than the global dirty
limit when there are 1000+ mounts, however that's very unlikely to happen,
especially in low memory profiles.

Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: set max_pause to lowest value on zero bdi_dirty

Some trace shows lots of bdi_dirty=0 lines where it's actually some
small value if w/o the accounting errors in the per-cpu bdi stats.

In this case the max pause time should really be set to the smallest
(non-zero) value to avoid IO queue underrun and improve throughput.

Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: charge leaked page dirties to active tasks

It's a years long problem that a large number of short-lived dirtiers
(eg. gcc instances in a fast kernel build) may starve long-run dirtiers
(eg. dd) as well as pushing the dirty pages to the global hard limit.

The solution is to charge the pages dirtied by the exited gcc to the
other random dirtying tasks. It sounds not perfect, however should
behave good enough in practice, seeing as that throttled tasks aren't
actually running so those that are running are more likely to pick it up
and get throttled, therefore promoting an equal spread.

Randy: fix compile error: 'dirty_throttle_leaks' undeclared in exit.c

Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on sub-page writes

When dd in 512bytes, generic_perform_write() calls
balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited() 8 times for the same page, but
obviously the page is only dirtied once.

Fix it by accounting tsk->nr_dirtied and bdp_ratelimits at page dirty time.

Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on redirty

De-account the accumulative dirty counters on page redirty.

Page redirties (very common in ext4) will introduce mismatch between
counters (a) and (b)

a) NR_DIRTIED, BDI_DIRTIED, tsk->nr_dirtied
b) NR_WRITTEN, BDI_WRITTEN

This will introduce systematic errors in balanced_rate and result in
dirty page position errors (ie. the dirty pages are no longer balanced
around the global/bdi setpoints).

Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: dirty ratelimit - think time compensation

Compensate the task's think time when computing the final pause time,
so that ->dirty_ratelimit can be executed accurately.

        think time := time spend outside of balance_dirty_pages()

In the rare case that the task slept longer than the 200ms period time
(result in negative pause time), the sleep time will be compensated in
the following periods, too, if it's less than 1 second.

Accumulated errors are carefully avoided as long as the max pause area
is not hitted.

Pseudo code:

        period = pages_dirtied / task_ratelimit;
        think = jiffies - dirty_paused_when;
        pause = period - think;

1) normal case: period > think

        pause = period - think
        dirty_paused_when = jiffies + pause
        nr_dirtied = 0

                             period time
              |===============================>|
                  think time      pause time
              |===============>|==============>|
        ------|----------------|---------------|------------------------
        dirty_paused_when   jiffies

2) no pause case: period <= think

        don't pause; reduce future pause time by:
        dirty_paused_when += period
        nr_dirtied = 0

                           period time
              |===============================>|
                                  think time
              |===================================================>|
        ------|--------------------------------+-------------------|----
        dirty_paused_when                                       jiffies

Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
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>
writeback: avoid tiny dirty poll intervals

The LKP tests see big 56% regression for the case fio_mmap_randwrite_64k.
Shaohua manages to root cause it to be the much smaller dirty pause times
and hence much more frequent invocations to the IO-less balance_dirty_pages().
Since fio_mmap_randwrite_64k effectively contains both reads and writes,
the more frequent pauses triggered more idling in the cfq IO scheduler.

The solution is to increase pause time all the way up to the max 200ms
in this case, which is found to restore most performance. This will help
reduce CPU overheads in other cases, too.

Note that I don't expect many performance critical workloads to run this
access pattern: the mmap read-on-write is rather inefficient and could
be avoided by doing normal writes syscalls.

CC: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Reported-by: Li Shaohua <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Tested-by: Li Shaohua <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: do strict bdi dirty_exceeded

This helps to reduce dirty throttling polls and hence CPU overheads.

bdi->dirty_exceeded typically only helps when suddenly starting 100+
dd's on a disk, in which case the dd's may need to poll
balance_dirty_pages() earlier than tsk->nr_dirtied_pause.

CC: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
writeback: balanced_rate cannot exceed write bandwidth

Add an upper limit to balanced_rate according to the below inequality.
This filters out some rare but huge singular points, which at least
enables more readable gnuplot figures.

When there are N dd dirtiers,

	balanced_dirty_ratelimit = write_bw / N

So it holds that

	balanced_dirty_ratelimit <= write_bw

The singular points originate from dirty_rate in the below formular:

        balanced_dirty_ratelimit = task_ratelimit * write_bw / dirty_rate
where
	dirty_rate = (number of page dirties in the past 200ms) / 200ms

In the extreme case, if all dd tasks suddenly get blocked on something
else and hence no pages are dirtied at all, dirty_rate will be 0 and
balanced_dirty_ratelimit will be inf. This could happen in reality.

Note that these huge singular points are not a real threat, since they
are _guaranteed_ to be filtered out by the
	min(balanced_dirty_ratelimit, task_ratelimit)
line in bdi_update_dirty_ratelimit(). task_ratelimit is based on the
number of dirty pages, which will never _suddenly_ fly away like
balanced_dirty_ratelimit. So any weirdly large balanced_dirty_ratelimit
will be cut down to the level of task_ratelimit.

There won't be tiny singular points though, as long as the dirty pages
lie inside the dirty throttling region (above the freerun region).
Because there the dd tasks will be throttled by balanced_dirty_pages()
and won't be able to suddenly dirty much more pages than average.

Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
fs: move code out of buffer.c

Move invalidate_bdev, block_sync_page into fs/block_dev.c.  Export
kill_bdev as well, so brd doesn't have to open code it.  Reduce
buffer_head.h requirement accordingly.

Removed a rather large comment from invalidate_bdev, as it looked a bit
obsolete to bother moving.  The small comment replacing it says enough.

Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>