From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/18] writeback: dirty position control
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:53:12 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110908025312.GA23199@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110906182034.GA30513@redhat.com>
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 02:20:34AM +0800, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 09:53:07AM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
>
> [..]
> > - in memory tight systems, (1) becomes strong enough to squeeze dirty
> > pages inside the control scope
> >
> > - in large memory systems where the "gravity" of (1) for pulling the
> > dirty pages to setpoint is too weak, (2) can back (1) up and drive
> > dirty pages to bdi_setpoint ~= setpoint reasonably fast.
> >
> > Unfortunately in JBOD setups, the fluctuation range of bdi threshold
> > is related to memory size due to the interferences between disks. In
> > this case, the bdi slope will be weighted sum of write_bw and bdi_thresh.
>
> Can you please elaborate a little more that what changes in JBOD setup.
>
> >
> > Given equations
> >
> > span = x_intercept - bdi_setpoint
> > k = df/dx = - 1 / span
> >
> > and the extremum values
> >
> > span = bdi_thresh
> > dx = bdi_thresh
> >
> > we get
> >
> > df = - dx / span = - 1.0
> >
> > That means, when bdi_dirty deviates bdi_thresh up, pos_ratio and hence
> > task ratelimit will fluctuate by -100%.
>
> I am not sure I understand above calculation. I understood the part that
> for single bdi case, you want 12.5% varation of bdi_setpoint over a
> range of write_bw [SP-write_bw/2, SP+write_bw/2]. This requirement will
> lead to.
>
> k = -1/8*write_bw
>
> OR span = 8*write_bw, hence
> k= -1/span
That's right.
> Now I missed the part that what is different in case of JBOD setup and
> how do you come up with values for that setup so that slope of bdi
> setpoint is sharper.
>
> IIUC, in case of single bdi case you want to use k=-1/(8*write_bw) and in
> case of JBOD you want to use k=-1/(bdi_thresh)?
Yeah.
> That means for single bdi case you want to trust bdi, write_bw but in
> case of JBOD you stop trusting that and just switch to bdi_thresh. Not
> sure what does it mean.
The main differences are,
1) in JBOD setup, bdi_thresh is fluctuating; in single bdi case,
bdi_thresh is pretty stable. The fluctuating bdi_thresh means
even if bdi_dirty is stable, dx=(bdi_dirty-bdi_setpoint) will be
fluctuating a lot. And the dx range is no long bounded by the
bdi write bandwidth, but proportional to bdi_thresh.
2) for single bdi case, bdi_dirty=nr_dirty is controlled by both
the memory based global control line and the bandwidth based bdi
control line. However for JBOD, we want to keep bdi_dirty reasonably
close to bdi_setpoint, however the global control line is not going
to help us directly. The bdi_thresh based slope can better serve
this purpose than the write bandwidth.
Thanks,
Fengguang
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-08 2:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-04 1:53 [PATCH 00/18] IO-less dirty throttling v11 Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 01/18] writeback: account per-bdi accumulated dirtied pages Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 02/18] writeback: dirty position control Wu Fengguang
2011-09-05 15:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-06 2:10 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-05 15:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-06 2:43 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 18:20 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-09-08 2:53 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2011-11-12 5:44 ` Nai Xia
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 03/18] writeback: dirty rate control Wu Fengguang
2011-09-29 11:57 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 04/18] writeback: stabilize bdi->dirty_ratelimit Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 05/18] writeback: per task dirty rate limit Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 15:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-06 23:27 ` Jan Kara
2011-09-06 23:34 ` Jan Kara
2011-09-07 7:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 1:04 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07 7:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 11:00 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 06/18] writeback: IO-less balance_dirty_pages() Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 12:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 2:46 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 07/18] writeback: dirty ratelimit - think time compensation Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 08/18] writeback: trace dirty_ratelimit Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 09/18] writeback: trace balance_dirty_pages Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 10/18] writeback: dirty position control - bdi reserve area Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 14:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 12:31 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-12 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-18 14:17 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-18 14:37 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-18 14:47 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-28 14:02 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-28 14:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-29 3:32 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-29 8:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-29 11:05 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-29 12:15 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 11/18] block: add bdi flag to indicate risk of io queue underrun Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 14:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 2:37 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07 7:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 12/18] writeback: balanced_rate cannot exceed write bandwidth Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 13/18] writeback: limit max dirty pause time Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 14:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 2:35 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-12 10:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-18 14:23 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 14/18] writeback: control " Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 15:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 2:02 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-12 10:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 15/18] writeback: charge leaked page dirties to active tasks Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 16:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 9:06 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07 0:17 ` Jan Kara
2011-09-07 9:37 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 16/18] writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on sub-page writes Wu Fengguang
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 17/18] writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on redirty Wu Fengguang
2011-09-06 16:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 0:22 ` Jan Kara
2011-09-07 1:18 ` Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07 6:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-07 8:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-07 16:42 ` Jan Kara
2011-09-07 16:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-08 8:51 ` Steven Whitehouse
2011-09-04 1:53 ` [PATCH 18/18] btrfs: fix dirtied pages accounting on sub-page writes Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07 13:32 ` [PATCH 00/18] IO-less dirty throttling v11 Wu Fengguang
2011-09-07 19:14 ` Trond Myklebust
2011-09-28 14:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-29 4:11 ` Wu Fengguang
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=20110908025312.GA23199@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arighi@develer.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--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).