public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	mtk.manpages@gmail.com, Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Subject: Re: sync_file_range(SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE) blocks?
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 10:05:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080603080515.GD27918@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cfd18e0f0806030101x40e18f9do5e58784695cdaa46@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue 2008-06-03 10:01:22, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> >> > > > All I can say so far is that I find the same as you do:
> >> > > > SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE (after writing) takes a significant amount of time,
> >> > > > more than half as long as when you add in SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WAIT_AFTER too.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Which make the sync_file_range call pretty pointless: your usage seems
> >> > > > perfectly reasonable to me, but somehow we've broken its behaviour.
> >> > > > I'll be investigating ...
> >> > >
> >> > > It will block on disk queue fullness - sysrq-W will tell.
> >> >
> >> > Ah, thank you.  What a disappointment, though it's understandable.
> >> > Doesn't that very severely limit the usefulness of the system call?
> >>
> >> A bit.  The request queue size is runtime tunable though.
> >
> > Which /sys is that? What happens if I set the queue size to pretty
> > much infinity, will memory management die horribly?
> >
> >> I expect major users of this system call will be applications which do
> >> small-sized overwrites into large files, mainly databases.  That is,
> >> once the application developers discover its existence.  I'm still
> >> getting expressions of wonder from people who I tell about the
> >> five-year-old fadvise().
> >
> > Hey, you have one user now, its called s2disk. But for this call to be
> > useful, we'd need asynchronous variant... is there such thing?
> >
> > Okay, I can fork and do the call from another process, but...
> >
> >> > I admit the flag isn't called SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE_WITHOUT_WAITING,
> >> > but I don't suppose Pavel and I are the only ones misled by it.
> >>
> >> Yup, this caveat/restriction should be in the manpage.
> >
> > Michael, this is something for you I guess?
> 
> Pavel,
> 
> Just to confirm: you are meaning that the sentence
> 
>     Notice that even this this may and will block if you attempt
>     to write more than request queue size.
> 
> should be added to the man page under the description of
> SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE, right?

Yes.
							Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

      reply	other threads:[~2008-06-03 17:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-30 10:26 sync_file_range(SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE) blocks? Pavel Machek
2008-05-30 13:58 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-05-30 20:43   ` Pavel Machek
2008-05-31 18:44     ` Hugh Dickins
2008-06-01  0:39       ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-01  7:23         ` Hugh Dickins
2008-06-01  8:15           ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-01 11:40             ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-01 20:37               ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-01 22:00                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-06-01 22:22                 ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-01 22:47                   ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-01 23:00                     ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-01 23:11                       ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-02  8:43                         ` Hugh Dickins
2008-06-02 11:18                           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-06-02 12:11                             ` Hugh Dickins
2008-06-02 11:43                 ` Jens Axboe
2008-06-02 12:40                   ` Hugh Dickins
2008-06-16 20:53                     ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-17  4:54                       ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-17 13:38                         ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-02 16:50                   ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-03  8:01               ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-06-03  8:05                 ` Pavel Machek [this message]

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=20080603080515.GD27918@elf.ucw.cz \
    --to=pavel@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hugh@veritas.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
    --cc=mtk.manpages@googlemail.com \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    /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