public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Joe Thornber <thornber@redhat.com>
Cc: Miquel van Smoorenburg <miquels@cistron.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>,
	miquels@cistron.nl, linux-lvm@sistina.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bdi_congestion_funp (was: Re: [PATCH] per process request limits (was Re: IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests))
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:00:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040220150013.GY27190@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040220145944.GM27549@reti>

On Fri, Feb 20 2004, Joe Thornber wrote:
> > +	devices = dm_table_get_devices(t);
> > +	for (d = devices->next; d != devices; d = d->next) {
> > +		struct dm_dev *dd = list_entry(d, struct dm_dev, list);
> > +		request_queue_t *q = bdev_get_queue(dd->bdev);
> > +		r |= test_bit(bdi_state, &(q->backing_dev_info.state));
> 
> Shouldn't this be calling your bdi_*_congested function rather than
> assuming it is a real device under dm ? (often not true).
> 
> I'm also very slightly worried that or'ing together the congestion
> results for all the seperate devices isn't always the right thing.
> These devices include anything that the targets are using, exception
> stores for snapshots, logs for mirror, all paths for multipath (or'ing
> is most likely to be wrong for multipath).

Yeah the patch is pretty much crap in that area, I don't think Miquel
was aiming for inclusion :)

I'd suggest making queue functions for congestion state as well so it
stacks properly.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  reply	other threads:[~2004-02-20 15:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20040216131609.GA21974@cistron.nl>
     [not found] ` <20040216133047.GA9330@suse.de>
     [not found]   ` <20040217145716.GE30438@traveler.cistron.net>
2004-02-18 23:52     ` IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19  1:24       ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19  1:52         ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19  2:01           ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19  1:26       ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-19  2:11         ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19  2:26           ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-19 10:15             ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 10:19               ` Jens Axboe
2004-02-19 20:59                 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-19 22:52                   ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 23:53                     ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-20  0:15                       ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-20  1:12                       ` [PATCH] per process request limits (was Re: IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests) Nick Piggin
2004-02-20  1:26                         ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-20  1:40                           ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-20  2:32                             ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-20 14:40                               ` [PATCH] bdi_congestion_funp (was: Re: [PATCH] per process request limits (was Re: IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests)) Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-20 14:57                                 ` Jens Axboe
2004-02-20 14:59                                 ` Joe Thornber
2004-02-20 15:00                                   ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2004-02-22 14:02                                     ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-02-22 19:55                                       ` Andrew Morton
2004-02-20  1:45                         ` [PATCH] per process request limits (was Re: IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests) Nick Piggin
2004-02-19  2:51           ` IO scheduler, queue depth, nr_requests Nick Piggin
2004-02-19 10:21             ` Jens Axboe

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=20040220150013.GY27190@suse.de \
    --to=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-lvm@sistina.com \
    --cc=miquels@cistron.net \
    --cc=miquels@cistron.nl \
    --cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
    --cc=thornber@redhat.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