From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: "Jun'ichi Nomura" <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix mapping->writeback_index to point to the last written page
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 10:20:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110304022003.GA9213@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D70443A.1010602@ce.jp.nec.com>
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 09:45:30AM +0800, Jun'ichi Nomura wrote:
> On 03/03/11 23:08, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Thu 03-03-11 21:31:19, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 10:26:19AM +0800, Jun'ichi Nomura wrote:
>> [2nd writeback session after 35sec]
>> flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_bio_queue: 8,0 W 94898562 + 8
>> flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_bio_queue: 8,0 W 94898570 + 8
>> flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_bio_queue: 8,0 W 94898578 + 8
>> ...
>> kworker/0:1-11 4606: block_rq_issue: 8,0 W 0 () 94898562 + 640
>> kworker/0:1-11 4606: block_rq_issue: 8,0 W 0 () 94899202 + 72
>> ...
> >> > flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_bio_queue: 8,0 W 94899962 + 8
> >> > flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_bio_queue: 8,0 W 94899970 + 8
> >> > flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_bio_queue: 8,0 W 94899978 + 8
> >> > flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_bio_queue: 8,0 W 94899986 + 8
> >> > flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_bio_queue: 8,0 W 94899994 + 8
> >> ==> > kworker/0:1-11 4606: block_rq_issue: 8,0 W 0 () 94899962 + 40
> >> > >> flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_bio_queue: 8,0 W 94898554 + 8
> >> ==> > >> flush-8:0-2743 4606: block_rq_issue: 8,0 W 0 () 94898554 + 8
> >>
> >> I'd expect the wrapped around 94898554+8 to be merged with 94899962+8.
> > How could they be merged? They are not continguous...
Oops, it is. It's 94898562+8 that is continuous with 94898554+8, however the
former has been submitted on max_sectors limit. So 94898554+8 lost the chance
to get merged.
> >> Why kworker/0:1-11 is submitting the request early? And the second
> >> request is submitted by flush-8:0-2743.
> > I'm not sure about that either - but I think that kworker is submitting
> > the work when unplug happens while flush ends up doing it when the queue is
> > alredy unplugged.
>
> Yes. For the above case, it was unplug.
>
> For other cases, the reason was max_sectors.
> Before writeback wraps around, the request has already grown to
> max_sectors size (~512KB) and doesn't accept new merge.
Yup, good explanation!
Thanks,
Fengguang
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-04 2:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-25 7:55 [PATCH] Fix mapping->writeback_index to point to the last written page Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-03-02 22:18 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-03 2:26 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-03-03 13:31 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-03-03 14:08 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-04 1:45 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-03-04 2:20 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
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=20110304022003.GA9213@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.