public inbox for linux-block@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com>,
	steve.kang@unisoc.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm: introduce budgt control in readahead
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 21:40:56 -1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZkRnCDasZNvFQUaY@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240515012350.1166350-3-zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>

Hello,

On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 09:23:50AM +0800, zhaoyang.huang wrote:
> +static unsigned long get_next_ra_size(struct readahead_control *ractl,
>  				      unsigned long max)
>  {
> +	unsigned long cur = ractl->ra->size;
> +	struct inode *inode = ractl->mapping->host;
> +	unsigned long budgt = inode->i_sb->s_bdev ?
> +			blk_throttle_budgt(inode->i_sb->s_bdev) : 0;

Technical correctness aside, I'm not convinced it's generally a good idea to
bubble up one specific IO control mechanism's detail all the way upto RA
layer. Besides what's the gain here? For continuous IO stream, whether some
RA bios are oversized or not shouldn't matter, no? Doesn't this just affect
the accuracy of the last RA IO of a finite read stream?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-05-15  7:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-05-15  1:23 [RFC PATCH 0/2] introduce precised blk-throttle control zhaoyang.huang
2024-05-15  1:23 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] block: introduce helper function to calculate bps budgt zhaoyang.huang
2024-05-15  1:23 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm: introduce budgt control in readahead zhaoyang.huang
2024-05-15  4:09   ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-05-15  6:31     ` Zhaoyang Huang
2024-05-15  7:40   ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2024-05-15  8:17     ` Zhaoyang Huang
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-05-09  2:39 [RFC PATCH 0/2] " zhaoyang.huang
2024-05-09  2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm: " zhaoyang.huang
2024-05-09  3:15   ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-05-10  2:43     ` Zhaoyang Huang
2024-05-10  3:18       ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-05-11  7:35         ` Zhaoyang Huang
2024-05-14  2:37           ` Zhaoyang Huang
2024-05-09 12:39   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-05-10  3:06     ` Zhaoyang Huang
2024-05-10  4:14       ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-05-10  7:08         ` Zhaoyang Huang

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=ZkRnCDasZNvFQUaY@slm.duckdns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=huangzhaoyang@gmail.com \
    --cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=steve.kang@unisoc.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox