From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263870AbTJ1HwM (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 02:52:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263871AbTJ1HwM (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 02:52:12 -0500 Received: from auth22.inet.co.th ([203.150.14.104]:31251 "EHLO auth22.inet.co.th") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263870AbTJ1HwL (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 02:52:11 -0500 From: Michael Frank To: Nick Piggin , Nigel Cunningham Subject: Re: 2.6.0-test8/test9 io scheduler needs tuning? Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 15:48:14 +0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 Cc: cliff white , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <200310261201.14719.mhf@linuxmail.org> <1067311879.1512.7.camel@laptop-linux> <3F9DE858.7020109@cyberone.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3F9DE858.7020109@cyberone.com.au> X-OS: KDE 3 on GNU/Linux MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200310281548.14510.mhf@linuxmail.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 28 October 2003 11:54, Nick Piggin wrote: > > Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > >As you rightly guessed, I was forgetting there are now 1000 jiffies per > >second. > > > >With your patch applied, I can achieve something close to 2.4 > >performance, but only if I set the limit on the number of pages to > >submit at one time quite high. If I set it to 3000, I can get 20107 4K > >pages written in 5267 jiffies (14MB/s) and can read them back at resume > >time (so cache is not a factor) in 4620 jiffies (16MB/s). In 2.4, I > >normally set the limit on async commits to 100, and achieve the same > >performance. 100 here makes it very jerky and much slower. > > > >Could there be some timeout value on BIOs that I might be able to > >tweak/disable during suspend? > > > > Try setting /sys/block/xxx/queue/iosched/antic_expire to 0 on your > device under IO and see how it goes. That shouldn't be causing the > problem though, especially as you are mostly writing I think? > > Otherwise might possibly be the queue plugging stuff, or maybe a > regression in the disk driver. > Haven't done much of 2.6 swsusp testing due to the little diversion with the scheduler, however I did notice one of those dreaded DMA timeouts with the SIS chipset again. Regards Michael