From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/13] writeback: explicit low bound for vm.dirty_ratio
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:06:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100810180625.GA4887@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100809235652.7113.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:12:06AM +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Subject: writeback: explicit low bound for vm.dirty_ratio
> > From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> > Date: Thu Jul 15 10:28:57 CST 2010
> >
> > Force a user visible low bound of 5% for the vm.dirty_ratio interface.
> >
> > This is an interface change. When doing
> >
> > echo N > /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio
> >
> > where N < 5, the old behavior is pretend to accept the value, while
> > the new behavior is to reject it explicitly with -EINVAL. This will
> > possibly break user space if they checks the return value.
>
> Umm.. I dislike this change. Is there any good reason to refuse explicit
> admin's will? Why 1-4% is so bad? Internal clipping can be changed later
> but explicit error behavior is hard to change later.
>
> personally I prefer to
> - accept all value, or
> - clipping value in dirty_ratio_handler
>
> Both don't have explicit ABI change.
Good point. Sorry for being ignorance. Neil is right that there is no
reason to impose some low bound. So the first option looks good.
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-10 18:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-05 16:10 [PATCH 00/13] writeback patches for 2.6.36 Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 01/13] writeback: reduce calls to global_page_state in balance_dirty_pages() Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 02/13] writeback: avoid unnecessary calculation of bdi dirty thresholds Wu Fengguang
2010-08-06 10:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 03/13] writeback: add comment to the dirty limits functions Wu Fengguang
2010-08-06 10:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-07 16:47 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 04/13] writeback: dont redirty tail an inode with dirty pages Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 05/13] writeback: fix queue_io() ordering Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 06/13] writeback: merge for_kupdate and !for_kupdate cases Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 07/13] writeback: explicit low bound for vm.dirty_ratio Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 23:34 ` Andrew Morton
2010-08-06 12:44 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-10 3:12 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-08-10 3:57 ` Neil Brown
2010-08-10 13:29 ` Jan Kara
2010-08-10 18:12 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-10 18:06 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2010-08-05 16:10 ` [PATCH 08/13] writeback: pass writeback_control down to move_expired_inodes() Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 09/13] writeback: the kupdate expire timestamp should be a moving target Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 10/13] writeback: kill writeback_control.more_io Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 11/13] writeback: sync expired inodes first in background writeback Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 12/13] writeback: try more writeback as long as something was written Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 17:00 ` Jan Kara
2010-08-05 22:39 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 22:50 ` Jan Kara
2010-08-05 16:11 ` [PATCH 13/13] writeback: introduce writeback_control.inodes_written Wu Fengguang
2010-08-05 23:08 ` [PATCH 00/13] writeback patches for 2.6.36 Andrew Morton
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=20100810180625.GA4887@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/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).