From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: [PATCH 29/35] nfs: in-commit pages accounting and wait queue Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:15:51 -0500 Message-ID: <1292274951.8795.28.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> References: <20101213144646.341970461@intel.com> <20101213150329.831955132@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: Andrew Morton , Jan Kara , Christoph Hellwig , Dave Chinner , "Theodore Ts'o" , Chris Mason , Peter Zijlstra , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , KOSAKI Motohiro , Greg Thelen , Minchan Kim , linux-mm , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, LKML To: Wu Fengguang Return-path: Received: from mx2.netapp.com ([216.240.18.37]:24354 "EHLO mx2.netapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750988Ab0LMVPz convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:15:55 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20101213150329.831955132@intel.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 22:47 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: > plain text document attachment (writeback-nfs-in-commit.patch) > When doing 10+ concurrent dd's, I observed very bumpy commits submission > (partly because the dd's are started at the same time, and hence reached > 4MB to-commit pages at the same time). Basically we rely on the server > to complete and return write/commit requests, and want both to progress > smoothly and not consume too many pages. The write request wait queue is > not enough as it's mainly network bounded. So add another commit request > wait queue. Only async writes need to sleep on this queue. > I'm not understanding the above reasoning. Why should we serialise commits at the per-filesystem level (and only for non-blocking flushes at that)? Cheers Trond -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer NetApp Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com www.netapp.com