From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/45] writeback: quit on wrap for .range_cyclic (afs)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 13:23:02 +0200
Message-ID: <20091007112302.GR30316@wotan.suse.de>
References: <20091007074902.913463607@intel.com> <20091007073818.318088777@intel.com> <32495.1254910626@redhat.com> <20091007102130.GQ30316@wotan.suse.de> <20091007104711.GA11014@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
	Myklebust Trond <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
	"jens.axboe@oracle.com" <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:44696 "EHLO mx1.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1758923AbZJGLXm (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 7 Oct 2009 07:23:42 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20091007104711.GA11014@localhost>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 06:47:11PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 06:21:30PM +0800, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 11:17:06AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > > Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Convert wbc.range_cyclic to new behavior: when past EOF, abort writeback
> > > > of the inode, which instructs writeback_single_inode() to delay it for
> > > > a while if necessary.
> > > > 
> > > > It removes one inefficient .range_cyclic IO pattern when writeback_index
> > > > wraps:
> > > > 	submit [10000-10100], (wrap), submit [0-100]
> > > > In which the submitted pages may be consisted of two distant ranges.
> > > > 
> > > > It also prevents submitting pointless IO for busy overwriters.
> > > > 
> > > > CC: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
> > 
> > I don't see why. Then the inode is given less write bandwidth than
> > those which don't wrap (or wrap on "nice" boundaries).
> 
> The "return on wrapped" behavior itself only offers a natural seek
> boundary to the upper layer.  It's mainly the "whether to delay"
> policy that will affect (overall) bandwidth.
> 
> If we choose to not sleep, and to go on with other inodes and then
> back to this inode, no bandwidth will be lost.
> 
> If we have done work with other inodes (if any), and choose to sleep
> for a while before restarting this inode, then we could lose bandwidth.
> The plus side is, we possibly avoid submitting extra IO if this inode
> is being busy overwritten. So it's a tradeoff.
> 
> The behavior after this patchset is, to keep busy as long as we can
> write any pages (in patch 38/45). So we still opt for bandwidth :)

No I mean bandwidth fairness between inodes.