From: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] xfs: introduce background inode reclaim work
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 08:49:56 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1302270596.2468.16.camel@doink> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110408001918.GH30279@dastard>
On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 10:19 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 04:16:22PM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 11:57 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > + if (!(mp->m_super->s_flags & MS_ACTIVE))
> > > + return;
> > > +
> > > + rcu_read_lock();
> > > + if (radix_tree_tagged(&mp->m_perag_tree, XFS_ICI_RECLAIM_TAG)) {
> > > + queue_delayed_work(xfs_syncd_wq, &mp->m_reclaim_work,
> > > + msecs_to_jiffies(xfs_syncd_centisecs / 6 * 10));
> >
> > Probably better to do the multiply before the divide here.
> > (But whatever... it's heuristic.)
>
> I always tend to divide before multiply to prevent the multiple from
> overflowing before the divide is done. In this case the granularity
> of xfs_syncd_centisecs is sufficient that the rounding error of the
> divide is meaningless. ie. 30s = 3000.
Funny, I normally do the same, but in this case
I was thinking about getting better accuracy.
The numbers involved (msecs / jiffies and the
number of msec) are not likely to be even close
to sqrt(INT32_MAX) (let alone sqrt(UINT64_MAX)).
Putting the calculation inside the parenthesis
is much better though, and I did notice that
change.
-Alex
> FWIW, I changed this from:
>
> xfs_syncd_centisecs / 6 * msecs_to_jiffies(10)
>
> because msecs_to_jiffies() has larger rounding problems. e.g. @
> CONFIG_HZ=250, msecs_to_jiffies(10) = 3 which is actually 12ms. That
> is, we want to sleep for 5s at a time, and the two different
> calculations give:
>
> New:
> msecs_to_jiffies(3000 / 6 * 10) = 5000 / 4 jiffies
> = 1250 jiffies
> = 5s
> Old:
> 3000 / 6 * msecs_to_jiffies(10) = 500 * 3 jiffies
> = 1500 jiffies
> = 6s
>
> This 20% rounding error is the reason we've recently noticed xfssyncd
> running every 36s rather than every 30s....
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-08 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-07 1:57 [PATCH 0/9] xfs; candidate fixes for 2.6.39 V2 Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 1:57 ` [PATCH 1/9] xfs: fix extent format buffer allocation size Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 1:57 ` [PATCH 2/9] xfs: introduce a xfssyncd workqueue Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 21:34 ` Alex Elder
2011-04-08 0:41 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 1:57 ` [PATCH 3/9] xfs: convert ENOSPC inode flushing to use new syncd workqueue Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 21:16 ` Alex Elder
2011-04-07 1:57 ` [PATCH 4/9] xfs: introduce background inode reclaim work Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 21:16 ` Alex Elder
2011-04-08 0:19 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-08 13:49 ` Alex Elder [this message]
2011-04-07 1:57 ` [PATCH 5/9] xfs: convert the xfsaild threads to a workqueue Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 21:16 ` Alex Elder
2011-04-07 1:57 ` [PATCH 6/9] xfs: clean up code layout in xfs_trans_ail.c Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 21:16 ` Alex Elder
2011-04-07 1:57 ` [PATCH 7/9] xfs: push the AIL from memory reclaim and periodic sync Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 21:16 ` Alex Elder
2011-04-07 1:57 ` [PATCH 8/9] xfs: catch bad block numbers freeing extents Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 21:16 ` Alex Elder
2011-04-07 1:57 ` [PATCH 9/9] xfs: convert log tail checking to a warning Dave Chinner
2011-04-07 21:16 ` Alex Elder
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-04-06 6:19 [PATCH 0/9] xfs: candidate fixes for 2.6.39 Dave Chinner
2011-04-06 6:19 ` [PATCH 4/9] xfs: introduce background inode reclaim work Dave Chinner
2011-04-06 18:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-07 0:06 ` Dave Chinner
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=1302270596.2468.16.camel@doink \
--to=aelder@sgi.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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