From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>,
David Zeuthen <david@fubar.dk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:50:00 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091123195000.GK8742@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091123144238.GA10275@srcf.ucam.org>
On Mon, Nov 23 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 03:31:40PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> > Well, take a look at laptop mode. A timer per-io is probably
> > unavoidable, but doing it at IO completion could mean a big decrease in
> > timer activity as opposed to doing it for each incoming IO. And since
> > you are looking at when the disk is idle, it makes a lot more sense to
> > me to do that when the we complete a request (and have no further
> > pending IO) rather than on incoming IO.
>
> Right. The current implementation I have does a del_timer() at
> submission (which should be moved to post-merge) - that should be cheap
> in the common case of a new command being submitted when there's already
> commands outstanding. There's then a mod_timer() at completion time.
> That's still a certain amount of expense, but it should be less.
>
> > Your biggest performance issue here is going to be sync IO, since the
> > disk will go idle very briefly before being kicked into action again.
>
> Ok, I'll try to benchmark that.
>
> The alternative (polling) method would be something much like Kay
> suggested - either add an extra field to stat or an extra sysfs file,
> then invalidate that on submission and set to jiffies on completion.
> It's not ideal from a wakeups perspective, but it's pretty low impact on
> the kernel side.
If the polling works out, then yes that approach is certainly a lot
better from a performance impact pov.
What kind of time intervals are you targetting?
--
Jens Axboe
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>,
David Zeuthen <david@fubar.dk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:50:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091123195000.GK8742@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091123144238.GA10275@srcf.ucam.org>
On Mon, Nov 23 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 03:31:40PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> > Well, take a look at laptop mode. A timer per-io is probably
> > unavoidable, but doing it at IO completion could mean a big decrease in
> > timer activity as opposed to doing it for each incoming IO. And since
> > you are looking at when the disk is idle, it makes a lot more sense to
> > me to do that when the we complete a request (and have no further
> > pending IO) rather than on incoming IO.
>
> Right. The current implementation I have does a del_timer() at
> submission (which should be moved to post-merge) - that should be cheap
> in the common case of a new command being submitted when there's already
> commands outstanding. There's then a mod_timer() at completion time.
> That's still a certain amount of expense, but it should be less.
>
> > Your biggest performance issue here is going to be sync IO, since the
> > disk will go idle very briefly before being kicked into action again.
>
> Ok, I'll try to benchmark that.
>
> The alternative (polling) method would be something much like Kay
> suggested - either add an extra field to stat or an extra sysfs file,
> then invalidate that on submission and set to jiffies on completion.
> It's not ideal from a wakeups perspective, but it's pretty low impact on
> the kernel side.
If the polling works out, then yes that approach is certainly a lot
better from a performance impact pov.
What kind of time intervals are you targetting?
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-23 19:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-17 14:37 [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-17 14:37 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-11-17 15:55 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-17 15:55 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-17 16:09 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle David Zeuthen
2009-11-17 16:09 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes David Zeuthen
2009-11-17 18:57 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-17 18:57 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 19:30 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 19:30 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 19:40 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 19:40 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 19:47 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 19:47 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 19:53 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 19:53 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 20:03 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 20:03 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 20:07 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 20:07 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 21:06 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 21:06 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 21:29 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 21:29 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 21:35 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 21:35 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 21:39 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 21:39 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 21:45 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 21:45 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 21:33 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 21:33 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 21:40 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-18 21:40 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 11:09 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 11:09 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 13:01 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-19 13:01 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-19 13:29 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 13:29 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 14:16 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-19 14:16 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-19 14:25 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 14:25 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 14:30 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-19 14:30 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-19 14:34 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 14:34 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 14:48 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-19 14:48 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-19 15:00 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Kay Sievers
2009-11-19 15:00 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Kay Sievers
2009-11-20 20:29 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-20 20:29 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-22 23:37 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Pavel Machek
2009-11-22 23:37 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Pavel Machek
2009-11-23 14:12 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-23 14:12 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-23 14:17 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Jens Axboe
2009-11-23 14:17 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Jens Axboe
2009-11-23 14:25 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-23 14:25 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-23 14:31 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Jens Axboe
2009-11-23 14:31 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Jens Axboe
2009-11-23 14:42 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-23 14:42 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-11-23 19:50 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-11-23 19:50 ` Jens Axboe
2009-11-23 19:54 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Matthew Garrett
2009-11-23 19:54 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes Matthew Garrett
2009-12-11 21:20 ` [RFC] Add support for events " Matthew Garrett
2009-11-18 22:10 ` [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents " Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-11-18 22:10 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
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=20091123195000.GK8742@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fubar.dk \
--cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
/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.