From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch,rfc v2] ext3/4: enhance fsync performance when using cfq
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:24:18 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <x49ljcy9g4t.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100408140944.GQ10103@kernel.dk> (Jens Axboe's message of "Thu, 8 Apr 2010 16:09:44 +0200")
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> writes:
> Precisely. The next question would be how to control the yielding. In
> this particular case, you want to be yielding to a specific cfqq. IOW,
> you essentially want to pass your slide on to that queue. The way the
> above is implemented, you could easily just switch to another unrelated
> queue. And if that is done, fairness is skewed without helping the
> yielding process at all (which was the intention).
Well, that's true in part. Prior to this patch, the process would idle,
keeping all other cfq_queues on the system from making progress. With
this patch, at least *somebody* else makes progress, getting you closer
to running the journal thread that you're blocked on. Ideally, you'd
want the thread you're waiting on to get disk time next, sure. You
would have to pass the process information down to the I/O scheduler for
that, and I'm not sure that the file system code knows which process to
hand off to. Does it?
Do we really want to go down this road at all? I'm not convinced.
Cheers,
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-08 14:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-07 21:18 [patch,rfc v2] ext3/4: enhance fsync performance when using cfq Jeff Moyer
2010-04-07 21:46 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 11:04 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 14:05 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 14:09 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 14:17 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 14:24 ` Jeff Moyer [this message]
2010-04-08 19:23 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-21 20:42 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-04-21 20:52 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-04-08 11:00 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 13:59 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 14:03 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 14:03 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-04-08 14:06 ` Jens Axboe
2010-04-08 14:10 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 14:25 ` Jeff Moyer
2010-04-08 14:31 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-08 19:10 ` Jeff Moyer
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=x49ljcy9g4t.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com \
--to=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).