From: Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com>
To: Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
miklos@szeredi.hu, yumiko.sugita.yf@hitachi.com,
masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com, hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com,
yuji.kakutani.uw@hitachi.com, soshima@redhat.com,
haoki@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] VM throttling: avoid blocking occasional writers
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 09:52:42 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45E380DA.6090509@hitachi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17888.14958.85897.289141@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Hi Nikita,
thanks for your comments.
Nikita Danilov wrote:
>> While Dirty+Writeback pages get more than 40% of memory, process-B is
>> blocked in balance_dirty_pages() until writeback of some (`write_chunk',
>> typically = 1536) dirty pages on disk-b is started.
>
> May be the simpler solution is to use separate variables to control
> ratelimit and write chunk?
No, I think it's difficult to throttle total Dirty+Writeback only with
write_chunk, because write_chunk just affects Dirty and Writeback of
each device (in this case, throttling is done in write-requests queue of
the each backing device, as I said in another mail).
Throttling of the total Dirty+Writeback should be also done in VM itself,
and to control that, I added `dirty_limit_ratio.'
> writeback_set_ratelimit() adjusts ratelimit_pages to avoid too frequent
> calls to balance_dirty_pages(), but once we are inside of
> writeback_inodes(), there is no need to write especially many pages in
> one go: overhead of any additional looping is negligible, when compared
> with the cost of writing.
>
> Speaking of which, now that expensive get_writeback_state() is gone from
> page-writeback.c why do we need adjustable ratelimiting at all? It looks
> like writeback_set_ratelimit() can be dropped, and fixed ratelimit used
> instead.
As far as I can see, adjustable ratelimiting is the actual cause of the
long wait on writing to disk with light load.
I think removing adjustable ratelimiting should be done in another patch...
Regards
--
Tomoki Sekiyama
Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-27 0:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-23 12:03 [RFC][PATCH 0/3] VM throttling: avoid blocking occasional writers Tomoki Sekiyama
2007-02-24 4:46 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-02-27 0:50 ` Tomoki Sekiyama
2007-02-27 1:39 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-03-02 1:26 ` Tomoki Sekiyama
2007-02-24 13:15 ` Nikita Danilov
2007-02-27 0:52 ` Tomoki Sekiyama [this message]
2007-03-01 12:47 ` Leroy van Logchem
2007-03-02 9:16 ` Brice Figureau
2007-03-02 13:06 ` Leroy van Logchem
2007-03-02 16:04 ` Brice Figureau
2007-03-07 13:53 ` Yuji Kakutani
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=45E380DA.6090509@hitachi.com \
--to=tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=haoki@redhat.com \
--cc=hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=nikita@clusterfs.com \
--cc=soshima@redhat.com \
--cc=yuji.kakutani.uw@hitachi.com \
--cc=yumiko.sugita.yf@hitachi.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.