From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@suse.com>,
Andrea Righi <andrea@betterlinux.com>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] buffered write IO controller in balance_dirty_pages()
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 09:34:04 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F73ADFC.7040404@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120328121308.568545879@intel.com>
(2012/03/28 21:13), Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Here is one possible solution to "buffered write IO controller", based on Linux
> v3.3
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/linux.git buffered-write-io-controller
>
> Features:
> - support blkio.weight
> - support blkio.throttle.buffered_write_bps
>
> Possibilities:
> - it's trivial to support per-bdi .weight or .buffered_write_bps
>
> Pros:
> 1) simple
> 2) virtually no space/time overheads
> 3) independent of the block layer and IO schedulers, hence
> 3.1) supports all filesystems/storages, eg. NFS/pNFS, CIFS, sshfs, ...
> 3.2) supports all IO schedulers. One may use noop for SSDs, inside virtual machines, over iSCSI, etc.
>
> Cons:
> 1) don't try to smooth bursty IO submission in the flusher thread (*)
> 2) don't support IOPS based throttling
> 3) introduces semantic differences to blkio.weight, which will be
> - working by "bandwidth" for buffered writes
> - working by "device time" for direct IO
>
> (*) Maybe not a big concern, since the bursties are limited to 500ms: if one dd
> is throttled to 50% disk bandwidth, the flusher thread will be waking up on
> every 1 second, keep the disk busy for 500ms and then go idle for 500ms; if
> throttled to 10% disk bandwidth, the flusher thread will wake up on every 5s,
> keep busy for 500ms and stay idle for 4.5s.
>
> The test results included in the last patch look pretty good in despite of the
> simple implementation.
>
yes, seems very good.
> [PATCH 1/6] blk-cgroup: move blk-cgroup.h in include/linux/blk-cgroup.h
> [PATCH 2/6] blk-cgroup: account dirtied pages
> [PATCH 3/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - bandwidth weight
> [PATCH 4/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - bandwidth limit
> [PATCH 5/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - bandwidth limit interface
> [PATCH 6/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - debug trace
>
> The changeset is dominated by the blk-cgroup.h move.
> The core changes (to page-writeback.c) are merely 77 lines.
>
> block/blk-cgroup.c | 27 +
> block/blk-cgroup.h | 364 --------------------------
> block/blk-throttle.c | 2
> block/cfq.h | 2
> include/linux/blk-cgroup.h | 396 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/trace/events/writeback.h | 34 ++
> mm/page-writeback.c | 77 +++++
> 7 files changed, 530 insertions(+), 372 deletions(-)
>
Thank you very much. I like this simple implementation.
I have 3 questions..
- Do you have any plan to enhance this to support hierarchical accounting ?
- Can we get wait-time-for-dirty-pages summary per blkio cgroup ?
- Can we get status (dirty/sec) per blkio cgroup ?
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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:[~2012-03-29 0:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-28 12:13 [PATCH 0/6] buffered write IO controller in balance_dirty_pages() Fengguang Wu
2012-03-28 12:13 ` [PATCH 1/6] blk-cgroup: move blk-cgroup.h in include/linux/blk-cgroup.h Fengguang Wu
2012-03-28 12:13 ` [PATCH 2/6] blk-cgroup: account dirtied pages Fengguang Wu
2012-03-28 12:13 ` [PATCH 3/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - bandwidth weight Fengguang Wu
2012-03-28 12:13 ` [PATCH 4/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - bandwidth limit Fengguang Wu
2012-03-28 12:13 ` [PATCH 5/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - bandwidth limit interface Fengguang Wu
2012-03-28 12:13 ` [PATCH 6/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - debug trace Fengguang Wu
2012-03-28 21:10 ` [PATCH 0/6] buffered write IO controller in balance_dirty_pages() Vivek Goyal
2012-03-28 22:35 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-03-29 2:48 ` Suresh Jayaraman
2012-03-29 0:34 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2012-03-29 1:22 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-04-01 4:16 ` Suresh Jayaraman
2012-04-01 8:30 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-04-01 20:56 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-04-03 8:00 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-04-03 14:53 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-04-03 23:32 ` Fengguang Wu
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=4F73ADFC.7040404@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=andrea@betterlinux.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=sjayaraman@suse.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).