public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [ext3][kernels >= 2.6.20.7 at least] KDE going comatose when FS is under heavy write load (massive starvation)
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:37:40 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070428163740.GA17061@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.98.0704280849150.9964@woody.linux-foundation.org>


* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Even with a good software IO scheduler, when you have disks that do 
> tagged queueing, if you fill up the disk queue with a few dozen 
> (depends on the disk what the queue limit is) huge write requests, it 
> doesn't really matter if the _software_ queuing then gives a big 
> advantage to reads coming in. They'll _still_ be waiting for a long 
> time, especially since you don't know what the disk firmware is going 
> to do.

by far the largest advantage of tagged queueing is when we go from 1 
pending request to 2 pending requests. The rest helps too for certain 
workloads (especially benchmarks), but if the IRQ handling is fast 
enough, having just 2 is more than enough to get 80% of the advantage of 
say of hardware-queue with a depth of 64.

So perhaps if there's any privileged reads going on then we should limit 
writes to a depth of 2 at most, with some timeout mechanism that would 
gradually allow the deepening of the hardware queue, as long as no 
highprio reads come inbetween? With 2 pending requests and even assuming 
worst-case seeks the user-visible latency would be on the order of 20-30 
msecs, which is at the edge of human perception. The problem comes when 
a hardware queue of 32-64 entries starves that one highprio read which 
then results in a 2+ seconds latency.

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2007-04-28 16:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-27  7:59 [ext3][kernels >= 2.6.20.7 at least] KDE going comatose when FS is under heavy write load (massive starvation) Mike Galbraith
2007-04-27  8:33 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-27  9:23   ` Mike Galbraith
2007-04-27 10:17   ` Mike Galbraith
2007-04-27 11:59   ` Marat Buharov
2007-04-27 12:30     ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-27 13:50       ` Mark Lord
2007-04-27 12:39     ` Manoj Joseph
2007-04-27 15:30     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-27 19:31       ` Andreas Dilger
2007-04-27 19:44         ` Mike Galbraith
2007-04-27 19:50         ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-27 20:05           ` Hua Zhong
2007-04-27 20:12           ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2007-04-27 20:12           ` Bill Huey
2007-04-28  5:37             ` Mikulas Patocka
2007-04-28  5:45               ` Mikulas Patocka
2007-04-28 21:57               ` Bill Huey
2007-04-28 22:38                 ` Mikulas Patocka
2007-04-27 20:29           ` Gabriel C
2007-04-27 20:45           ` Stephen Clark
2007-04-27 20:54           ` Manoj Joseph
2007-04-28  8:45           ` Matthias Andree
2007-04-27 22:18         ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-03 17:38           ` Alex Tomas
2007-05-03 23:54             ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-04  6:18               ` Alex Tomas
2007-05-04  6:38                 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-04  6:57                   ` Alex Tomas
2007-05-04  7:18                     ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-04  7:39                       ` Alex Tomas
2007-05-04  8:02                         ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-28  8:44       ` Matthias Andree
2007-04-28 20:46   ` Mikulas Patocka
2007-04-28 21:12     ` Lee Revell
2007-04-29 20:49       ` Mark Lord
2007-04-29 21:17       ` Mikulas Patocka
2007-04-27 15:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-27 15:41   ` John Anthony Kazos Jr.
2007-04-27 15:54     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-27 16:24       ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-04-27 19:43       ` Marko Macek
2007-04-27 18:31   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-27 19:09     ` Zan Lynx
2007-04-27 22:07       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-27 19:27     ` Mike Galbraith
2007-04-28  8:51     ` Matthias Andree
2007-04-28  8:59       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-28 16:30       ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-28 16:56         ` Paolo Ornati
2007-04-27 19:28   ` Mike Galbraith
2007-04-27 20:06   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-04-27 21:22     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-28  4:25   ` Mike Galbraith
2007-04-28  6:32     ` Mike Galbraith
2007-04-28  7:01       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-28  7:12         ` Mike Galbraith
2007-04-28  6:32   ` Mikulas Patocka
2007-04-28 16:05     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-28 16:37       ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-04-28 17:11         ` Mikulas Patocka
2007-04-30  6:57           ` Jens Axboe
2007-04-28 17:55       ` Mikulas Patocka
2007-04-30  6:56       ` Jens Axboe
2007-05-02  6:53   ` Jens Axboe
2007-05-02  7:36     ` Mike Galbraith

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=20070428163740.GA17061@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikulas@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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