public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS thread inflation in 2.6.23rc
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 14:22:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200708081422.10373.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070808121359.GP52011508@sgi.com>

On Wednesday 08 August 2007 14:13:59 David Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 12:40:21PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > 
> > In 2.6.23rc I have a new kernel thread running from XFS:
> > 
> > 30137 ?        S<     0:00 [xfs_mru_cache]
> > 
> > Is that one really needed? Can it be started only on demand when that MRU
> > feature is used? 
> 
> It uses a single threaded workqueue for reaping objects and the thread comes
> along with that. Creating the workqueue on demand would require creating a
> kernel thread inside a transaction and that's not some thing we want to do.

Why not? I can't think of any possible problem except memory allocation
recursion, but even that should be handled.

> Besides, what's the point of having nice constructs like dedicated
> workqueues

It's a resource that shouldn't be overused.

Especially for such a obscure feature -- i remember reviewing your rationale
for the MRU cache and the probability of this applying to 99.9+% of users ever 
is pretty small. If you insist adding such things make them as least 
as unobtrusive as possible.

> if people complain when they get used to solve problems? 

Does XFS really need that many threads? Seems doubtful to me.

Ok part of the problem is that the workqueues are a little dumb.
e.g. it's highly doubtful per SMT thread workqueues really make any sense.
It would be probably enough to have one per socket or one per node.
But that's a separate issue from just gratuitously adding new ones.

-Andi

  reply	other threads:[~2007-08-08 12:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-08-08 10:40 XFS thread inflation in 2.6.23rc Andi Kleen
2007-08-08 12:13 ` David Chinner
2007-08-08 12:22   ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2007-08-08 13:14     ` David Chinner
2007-08-08 13:26       ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-09 11:03         ` David Chinner
2007-08-10 19:34           ` Eric Sandeen
2007-08-10 23:49             ` David Chinner
2007-08-11  1:21               ` Eric Sandeen

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=200708081422.10373.ak@suse.de \
    --to=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=dgc@sgi.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