From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, steve.kang@unisoc.com,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] driver: loop: introduce synchronized read for loop driver
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 09:30:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <31091c95-1d0c-4e5a-a53b-929529bf0996@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGWkznGf1eN-iszG21jGNq13C9yz8S0PW03hLc40Gjhn6LRp0Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 9/22/25 8:50 PM, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> Yes, we have tried to solve this case from the above perspective. As
> to the scheduler, packing small tasks to one core(Big core in ARM)
> instead of spreading them is desired for power-saving reasons. To the
> number of kworker threads, it is upon current design which will create
> new work for each blkcg. According to ANDROID's current approach, each
> PID takes one cgroup and correspondingly a kworker thread which
> actually induces this scenario.
More cgroups means more overhead from cgroup-internal tasks, e.g.
accumulating statistics. How about requesting to the Android core team
to review the approach of associating one cgroup with each PID? I'm
wondering whether the approach of one cgroup per aggregate profile
(SCHED_SP_BACKGROUND, SCHED_SP_FOREGROUND, ...) would work.
Thanks,
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-23 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-22 3:29 [RFC PATCH] driver: loop: introduce synchronized read for loop driver zhaoyang.huang
2025-09-22 18:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-09-23 3:50 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2025-09-23 16:30 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2025-09-24 9:13 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2025-09-24 10:04 ` Ming Lei
2025-09-25 1:14 ` Zhaoyang Huang
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=31091c95-1d0c-4e5a-a53b-929529bf0996@acm.org \
--to=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=huangzhaoyang@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=steve.kang@unisoc.com \
--cc=zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.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