linux-xfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
	Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG <s.priebe@profihost.ag>
Subject: Re: xfs cgroup writeback support
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 20:25:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190625032527.GF1611011@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190624134315.21307-1-hch@lst.de>

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 03:43:13PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> this small series adds cgroup writeback support to XFS.  Unlike
> the previous iteration of the support a few years ago it also
> ensures that that trailing bios in an ioend inherit the right
> cgroup.  It has been tested with the shared/011 xfstests test
> that was written to test this functionality in all file systems,
> and manually by Stefan Priebe.
> 
> This work was funded by Profihost AG.
> 
> Note that the first patch was also in my series to move the xfs
> writepage code to iomap.c and the second one will conflict with
> it.  We'll need to sort out which series to merge first, but given
> how simple this one I would suggest to go for this one.

By the way, did all the things Dave complained about in last year's
attempt[1] to add cgroup writeback support get fixed?  IIRC someone
whose name I didn't recognise complained about log starvation due to
REQ_META bios being charged to the wrong cgroup and other misbehavior.

Also, I remember that in the earlier 2017 discussion[2] we talked about
a fstest to test that writeback throttling actually capped bandwidth
usage correctly.  I haven't been following cgroupwb development since
2017 -- does it not ratelimit bandwidth now, or is there some test for
that?  The only test I could find was shared/011 which only tests the
accounting, not bandwidth.

--D

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/comment/21658249/
[2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/comment/21042703/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-06-25  3:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-24 13:43 xfs cgroup writeback support Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-24 13:43 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfs: simplify xfs_chain_bio Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-24 16:17   ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-06-25 10:00     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-24 13:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: implement cgroup aware writeback Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-24 16:22   ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-06-25 10:00     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-25 10:06       ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
2019-06-25  3:25 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2019-06-25 10:05   ` xfs cgroup writeback support Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-26  5:57     ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-06-26  5:57       ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-26 15:09         ` Darrick J. Wong

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=20190625032527.GF1611011@magnolia \
    --to=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=s.priebe@profihost.ag \
    /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).