From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m98KhXbj023474 for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2008 13:43:33 -0700 Received: from sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 17F44982559 for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2008 13:45:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id V3nAx69txFYevHxh for ; Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:45:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48ED1BD8.60309@sandeen.net> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:45:12 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: xfsaild centisecs /proc wakeup control? References: <48ED0DA9.7070002@tlinx.org> In-Reply-To: <48ED0DA9.7070002@tlinx.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: "Linda A. Walsh" Cc: xfs-oss Linda A. Walsh wrote: > I was looking at powertop again recently, and noticed xfsbufd and xfsaild at the top > of the wakeup list. > xfsbufd can be tuned with /proc/sys/fs/xfs/xfsbufd_centisecs along with 3 other > time-related tunables. However, I don't see one for xfsaild. Is that an oversight? On what kernel? As far as the wakeups go, I thought this was fixed; see for example: TAKE 977545 - xfsaild causing too many wakeups on 2.6.27-rc8 with xfs mounted, and powertop 1.9, I don't see xfs up very high at all: Top causes for wakeups: 29.4% ( 15.0) : pata_sil680 9.4% ( 4.8) : eth0 7.8% ( 4.0) iscsid : __mod_timer (process_timeout) ... 2.0% ( 1.0) xfsbufd : __mod_timer (process_timeout) 2.0% ( 1.0) xfsaild : __mod_timer (process_timeout) -Eric