public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
	Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cfq-iosched: RQ_NOIDLE enabled for SYNC_WORKLOAD
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 11:52:00 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100707155200.GH2474@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100707154631.GG2474@redhat.com>

On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 11:46:31AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 05:23:47PM +0200, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> > RQ_NOIDLE flag is meaningful and should be honored for SYNC_WORKLOAD,
> > without further checks.
> > RQ_NOIDLE can be used to mark the last request of a sequence for which
> > - we want to idle between the requests of the sequence, to keep locality
> > - we don't want to idle after the sequence, because we know that no new
> >   nearby requests will follow, so we should switch servicing other
> >   queues.
> 
> Corrado, in higher layers any WRITE_SYNC request currently is marked
> as RQ_NOIDLE. At that point it is just not known whether there will be
> another request after this or not. So I would not think of RQ_NOIDLE
> as being conclusively telling us that this is last request in the
> sequence.
> 
> I think requst being WRITE_SYNC, we just don't know if the application
> is going to write more or not immediately. fsync, O_SYNC etc fall in
> this category.
> 
> But in general I like the idea of getting rid of idling on as many cases
> as possiblle. Jeff's recent posting to fix fsync issue depends on idling
> even on WRITE_SYNC queues so your patch and his patchsets are
> fundamentally incompatible.
> 
> Whether to idle on WRITE_SYNC or not, I will leave it to Jens (I just
> don't know the answer to that question. :-)). But in general I want to
> get rid of idling as much as possible otherwise it becomes a serious
> bottleneck in any kind of performance testing on higher end storage.
> 
> At the same time not idling runs the risk of process doing WRITE_SYNC
> not getting fair share in presence of sequential readers if writer does
> not keep the queue busy.
> 
> I will do some testing with this patchset little later.

Hmm..., noticed that you are still using Jens's old mail id. Fixing it.

Thanks
Vivek
> 
> > This patch fixes this behaviour, making it similar to how it behaved
> > before 8e55063, but still fixing the corner cases that were the
> > motivation for it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  block/cfq-iosched.c |   15 ++++++++++-----
> >  1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/block/cfq-iosched.c b/block/cfq-iosched.c
> > index 5ef9a5d..cac3afb 100644
> > --- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
> > +++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
> > @@ -3356,12 +3356,17 @@ static void cfq_completed_request(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq)
> >  				cfqd->noidle_tree_requires_idle |= bitmask;
> >  
> >  			/*
> > -			 * Idling is enabled for SYNC_WORKLOAD.
> > -			 * SYNC_NOIDLE_WORKLOAD idles at the end of the tree
> > -			 * only if we processed at least one !rq_noidle request
> > +			 * Idling is enabled for:
> > +			 * - the last sync queue of a group
> > +			 * - SYNC_WORKLOAD queues, for !rq_noidle requests
> > +			 * - SYNC_NOIDLE_WORKLOAD "at the end of the tree"
> > +			 *   if at least one queue sent !rq_noidle requests
> > +			 *   not followed by at least one rq_noidle request.
> >  			 */
> > -			if (cfqd->serving_type == SYNC_WORKLOAD
> > -			    || cfqd->noidle_tree_requires_idle
> > +			if ((cfqd->serving_type == SYNC_WORKLOAD
> > +			     && !rq_noidle(rq))
> > +			    || (cfqd->serving_type == SYNC_NOIDLE_WORKLOAD
> > +				&& cfqd->noidle_tree_requires_idle)
> >  			    || cfqq->cfqg->nr_cfqq == 1)
> >  				cfq_arm_slice_timer(cfqd);
> >  		}
> > -- 
> > 1.6.4.4

  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-07 15:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-07 15:23 [PATCH 1/2] cfq-iosched: fix tree-wide handling of rq_noidle Corrado Zoccolo
2010-07-07 15:23 ` [PATCH 2/2] cfq-iosched: RQ_NOIDLE enabled for SYNC_WORKLOAD Corrado Zoccolo
2010-07-07 15:46   ` Vivek Goyal
2010-07-07 15:52     ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2010-07-07 16:04     ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-07-07 16:13     ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-07 17:12       ` Vivek Goyal
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-07-07 15:55 [PATCH 1/2] cfq-iosched: fix tree-wide handling of rq_noidle Corrado Zoccolo
2010-07-07 15:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] cfq-iosched: RQ_NOIDLE enabled for SYNC_WORKLOAD Corrado Zoccolo

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=20100707155200.GH2474@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
    --cc=guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shaohua.li@intel.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