+Writeback
+=========
+
+Page cache is dirtied through buffered writes and shared mmaps and
+written asynchronously to the backing filesystem by the writeback
+mechanism. Writeback sits between the memory and IO domains and
+regulates the proportion of dirty memory by balancing dirtying and
+write IOs.
+
+On traditional cgroup hierarchies, relationships between different
+controllers cannot be established making it impossible for writeback
+to operate accounting for cgroup resource restrictions and all
+writeback IOs are attributed to the root cgroup.
+
+If both the blkio and memory controllers are used on the v2 hierarchy
+and the filesystem supports cgroup writeback, writeback operations
+correctly follow the resource restrictions imposed by both memory and
+blkio controllers.
+
+Writeback examines both system-wide and per-cgroup dirty memory status
+and enforces the more restrictive of the two. Also, writeback control
+parameters which are absolute values - vm.dirty_bytes and
+vm.dirty_background_bytes - are distributed across cgroups according
+to their current writeback bandwidth.
+
+There's a peculiarity stemming from the discrepancy in ownership
+granularity between memory controller and writeback. While memory
+controller tracks ownership per page, writeback operates on inode
+basis. cgroup writeback bridges the gap by tracking ownership by
+inode but migrating ownership if too many foreign pages, pages which
+don't match the current inode ownership, have been encountered while
+writing back the inode.
+
+This is a conscious design choice as writeback operations are
+inherently tied to inodes making strictly following page ownership
+complicated and inefficient. The only use case which suffers from
+this compromise is multiple cgroups concurrently dirtying disjoint
+regions of the same inode, which is an unlikely use case and decided
+to be unsupported. Note that as memory controller assigns page
+ownership on the first use and doesn't update it until the page is
+released, even if cgroup writeback strictly follows page ownership,
+multiple cgroups dirtying overlapping areas wouldn't work as expected.
+In general, write-sharing an inode across multiple cgroups is not well
+supported.
+
+Filesystem support for cgroup writeback
+---------------------------------------
+
+A filesystem can make writeback IOs cgroup-aware by updating
+address_space_operations->writepage[s]() to annotate bio's using the
+following two functions.
+
+* wbc_init_bio(@wbc, @bio)
+
+ Should be called for each bio carrying writeback data and associates
+ the bio with the inode's owner cgroup. Can be called anytime
+ between bio allocation and submission.
+
+* wbc_account_io(@wbc, @page, @bytes)
+
+ Should be called for each data segment being written out. While
+ this function doesn't care exactly when it's called during the
+ writeback session, it's the easiest and most natural to call it as
+ data segments are added to a bio.
+
+With writeback bio's annotated, cgroup support can be enabled per
+super_block by setting MS_CGROUPWB in ->s_flags. This allows for
+selective disabling of cgroup writeback support which is helpful when
+certain filesystem features, e.g. journaled data mode, are
+incompatible.
+
+wbc_init_bio() binds the specified bio to its cgroup. Depending on
+the configuration, the bio may be executed at a lower priority and if
+the writeback session is holding shared resources, e.g. a journal
+entry, may lead to priority inversion. There is no one easy solution
+for the problem. Filesystems can try to work around specific problem
+cases by skipping wbc_init_bio() or using bio_associate_blkcg()
+directly.
Code Review / kvmfornfv.git / blobdiff