From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757581AbXJaLYr (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:24:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753591AbXJaLYj (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:24:39 -0400 Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.144]:56452 "EHLO e4.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750785AbXJaLYj (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:24:39 -0400 Message-ID: <472865E8.4070908@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:54:24 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Organization: IBM User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (X11/20070824) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Piggin CC: Andrew Morton , Linux MM Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] Swap delay accounting, include lock_page() delays References: <20071031075243.22225.53636.sendpatchset@balbir-laptop> <200710311841.53671.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <200710312010.33833.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200710312010.33833.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Nick Piggin wrote: > On Wednesday 31 October 2007 18:41, Nick Piggin wrote: >> On Wednesday 31 October 2007 18:52, Balbir Singh wrote: >>> Reported-by: Nick Piggin >>> >>> The delay incurred in lock_page() should also be accounted in swap delay >>> accounting >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Balbir Singh >> Ah right, I forgot to resend this one, sorry. Thanks for remembering. > > Although, I think I had a bit more detail in the changelog which > I think should be kept. > > Basically, swap delay accounting seems quite broken as of now, > because what it is counting is the time required to allocate a new > page and submit the IO, but not actually the time to perform the IO > at all (which I'd expect will be significant, although possibly in > some workloads the actual page allocation will dominate). > This looks quite good to me. I'm off attending a wedding, I'll resend the patch when I am back. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e1.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l9VBOc35012246 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:24:38 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l9VBOcnM491920 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:24:38 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l9VBObSN030737 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:24:37 -0400 Message-ID: <472865E8.4070908@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:54:24 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Swap delay accounting, include lock_page() delays References: <20071031075243.22225.53636.sendpatchset@balbir-laptop> <200710311841.53671.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <200710312010.33833.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200710312010.33833.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux MM Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-ID: Nick Piggin wrote: > On Wednesday 31 October 2007 18:41, Nick Piggin wrote: >> On Wednesday 31 October 2007 18:52, Balbir Singh wrote: >>> Reported-by: Nick Piggin >>> >>> The delay incurred in lock_page() should also be accounted in swap delay >>> accounting >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Balbir Singh >> Ah right, I forgot to resend this one, sorry. Thanks for remembering. > > Although, I think I had a bit more detail in the changelog which > I think should be kept. > > Basically, swap delay accounting seems quite broken as of now, > because what it is counting is the time required to allocate a new > page and submit the IO, but not actually the time to perform the IO > at all (which I'd expect will be significant, although possibly in > some workloads the actual page allocation will dominate). > This looks quite good to me. I'm off attending a wedding, I'll resend the patch when I am back. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL -- 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: email@kvack.org