From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bdi: Move cgroup bdi_writeback to a dedicated low concurrency workqueue
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 16:17:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180523231736.GT1718769@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1527112995.7898.31.camel@surriel.com>
Hello, Rik.
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 06:03:15PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Dumb question. Does setting max_active to 1 mean
> that every cgwb_release_workfn() ends up forcing
> another RCU grace period on the whole system, while
> today you might have a bunch of them waiting on the
> same RCU grace period advance?
>
> Would it be faster to have some number (up to 16?)
> push RCU once, at the same time, instead of having
> each of them push RCU into a next grace period one
> after another?
Oh yeah, you're absolutely right. This would end up doing a lot of
back-to-back synchronize_rcu_expedited() calls which can't be good.
I'll send a patch to push it upto 16.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-23 23:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-23 17:56 [PATCH] bdi: Move cgroup bdi_writeback to a dedicated low concurrency workqueue Tejun Heo
2018-05-23 18:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-23 18:51 ` Tejun Heo
2018-05-23 19:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-23 21:29 ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-23 22:03 ` Rik van Riel
2018-05-23 23:17 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2018-05-23 23:25 ` [PATCH] bdi: Increase the concurrecy level of cgwb_release_wq Tejun Heo
2018-05-24 10:19 ` [PATCH] bdi: Move cgroup bdi_writeback to a dedicated low concurrency workqueue Jan Kara
2018-05-24 14:00 ` Tejun Heo
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=20180523231736.GT1718769@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=jack@suse.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
/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.