From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262505AbVFJHWB (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2005 03:22:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262497AbVFJHWA (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2005 03:22:00 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:17574 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262505AbVFJHUj (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2005 03:20:39 -0400 Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 09:21:30 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Takashi Ikebe Cc: Andrew Morton , andrea@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Real-time problem due to IO congestion. Message-ID: <20050610072130.GC29591@suse.de> References: <42A91D36.8090506@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20050609234231.42a10763.akpm@osdl.org> <42A93D85.4060005@lab.ntt.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42A93D85.4060005@lab.ntt.co.jp> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (please don't top post) On Fri, Jun 10 2005, Takashi Ikebe wrote: > > I see. > The program which I tested is just sample, and I wanted to know the > phenomena is spec or bug. > I also understand that this problem is spec, and need to apply some > buffering to such applications. Additionally, following up on Andrew, even with prioritized request allocations you could get equally long stuck if you just had lots of high prio allocaters queueing io. So rethinking the setup is definitely good advice. -- Jens Axboe