From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q2RHO8d7134523 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:24:08 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id h6JNYJfzY3Bb9bEH for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:23:57 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: Do background CIL flushes via a workqueue Message-ID: <20120327172357.GE28707@redhat.com> References: <1332841605-3538-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20120327143127.GA11434@infradead.org> <20120327155759.GB28707@redhat.com> <20120327160300.GA22555@infradead.org> <20120327161941.GC28707@redhat.com> <20120327170309.GA6712@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120327170309.GA6712@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 01:03:09PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:19:41PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > So xfs either need to resort to similar optimizaiton where IO type from > > both the process context is of same type or try to do all the IO from > > one process context. > > All XFS log I/O is marked SYNC and (FUA and/or FLUSH). Well, if all the requests are marked with FUA/FLUSH, then I think these requests will not even be given to IO scheduler. And we should not have the issue of idling. if (bio->bi_rw & (REQ_FLUSH | REQ_FUA)) { spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock); where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FLUSH; goto get_rq; } Thanks Vivek _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs