From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/45] writeback: introduce wait queue for balance_dirty_pages() Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 10:08:36 +0200 Message-ID: <1254989316.26976.260.camel@twins> References: <20091007073818.318088777@intel.com> <20091007074903.422089703@intel.com> <20091008100159.fb6770cf.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091008015822.GB14224@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Andrew Morton , Theodore Tso , Christoph Hellwig , Dave Chinner , Chris Mason , "Li, Shaohua" , Myklebust Trond , "jens.axboe@oracle.com" , Jan Kara , Nick Piggin , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , LKML To: Wu Fengguang Return-path: Received: from viefep14-int.chello.at ([62.179.121.34]:20558 "EHLO viefep14-int.chello.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755194AbZJHIFe (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Oct 2009 04:05:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20091008015822.GB14224@localhost> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:58 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: > > > How this runqueue->nr_iowait is handled now ? > > Good question. io_schedule() has an old comment for throttling IO wait: > > * But don't do that if it is a deliberate, throttling IO wait (this task > * has set its backing_dev_info: the queue against which it should throttle) > */ > void __sched io_schedule(void) > > So it looks both Jens' and this patch behaves right in ignoring the > iowait accounting for balance_dirty_pages() :) Well it is a change in behaviour, and I think IOWAIT makes sense when we're blocked due to io throttle.. Hmm?