From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] fuse writable mmap design
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:01:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1195156900.22457.32.camel@lappy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1Iskpw-0000qY-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 20:57 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > The next point then, I'd expect your fuse_page_mkwrite() to push
> > writeout of your 32-odd mmap pages instead of poll.
>
> You're talking about this:
>
> + wait_event(fc->writeback_waitq,
> + fc->numwrite < FUSE_WRITEBACK_THRESHOLD);
>
> right? It's one of the things I need to clean out, there's no point
> in fc->numwrite, which is essentially the same as the BDI_WRITEBACK
> counter.
>
> OTOH, I'm thinking about adding a per-fs limit (adjustable for
> privileged mounts) of dirty+writeback.
>
> I'm not sure how hard would it be to add support for this into
> balance_dirty_pages(). So I'm thinking of a parameter in struct
> backing_dev_info that is used to clip the calculated per-bdi threshold
> below this maximum.
>
> How would that affect the proportions algorithm? What would happen to
> the unused portion? Would it adapt to the slowed writeback and
> allocate it to some other writer?
The unused part is gone, I've not yet found a way to re-distribute this
fairly.
[ It's one of my open-problems, I can do a min_ratio per bdi, but not
yet a max_ratio ]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] fuse writable mmap design
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:01:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1195156900.22457.32.camel@lappy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1Iskpw-0000qY-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 20:57 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > The next point then, I'd expect your fuse_page_mkwrite() to push
> > writeout of your 32-odd mmap pages instead of poll.
>
> You're talking about this:
>
> + wait_event(fc->writeback_waitq,
> + fc->numwrite < FUSE_WRITEBACK_THRESHOLD);
>
> right? It's one of the things I need to clean out, there's no point
> in fc->numwrite, which is essentially the same as the BDI_WRITEBACK
> counter.
>
> OTOH, I'm thinking about adding a per-fs limit (adjustable for
> privileged mounts) of dirty+writeback.
>
> I'm not sure how hard would it be to add support for this into
> balance_dirty_pages(). So I'm thinking of a parameter in struct
> backing_dev_info that is used to clip the calculated per-bdi threshold
> below this maximum.
>
> How would that affect the proportions algorithm? What would happen to
> the unused portion? Would it adapt to the slowed writeback and
> allocate it to some other writer?
The unused part is gone, I've not yet found a way to re-distribute this
fairly.
[ It's one of my open-problems, I can do a min_ratio per bdi, but not
yet a max_ratio ]
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-15 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-15 16:10 [RFC] fuse writable mmap design Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 16:10 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 19:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 19:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 19:37 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 19:37 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 19:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 19:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 19:57 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 19:57 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 20:01 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2007-11-15 20:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-15 20:11 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-11-15 20:11 ` Miklos Szeredi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1195156900.22457.32.camel@lappy \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.