public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>, Tao Ma <tm@tao.ma>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CFQ: async queue blocks the whole system
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 05:29:22 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110610092922.GE4183@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DF1E1EB.8010808@kernel.dk>

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:20:43AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2011-06-10 11:17, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:19:12AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > 
> > [..]
> >>> If there is no major advantage of draining sync requests before async
> >>> is dispatched, I think this should be an easy fix.
> >> I thought this is to avoid sync latency if we switch from an async
> >> queue to sync queue later.
> > 
> > Is it about the sync request latency which has already been dispatched? I 
> > really wish that driver and disk should do some prioritazation for reads
> > here and CFQ does not have to jump through hoops like drain sync requests
> > before async requests are dispatched.
> 
> That would never work. Are you suggesting putting that logic in all
> drivers? Or relying on hardware to get the fairness right? Not going to
> happen.

I was hoping that hardware does some prioritization. Well, in this case
even if hardware maintains FIFO behavior it should be good enough.

But I would not claim anything in this regard as I have never experimented
with it and have no idea that how sync latencies are impacted if we don't
drain the queue before dispathing WRITEs.

I was just wondering that with current generation hardware is it bad
enough that we need to keep this logic around?

Thanks
Vivek

  reply	other threads:[~2011-06-10  9:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-09 10:49 CFQ: async queue blocks the whole system Tao Ma
2011-06-09 14:14 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-09 14:34   ` Jens Axboe
2011-06-09 14:47   ` Tao Ma
2011-06-09 15:37     ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-09 15:44       ` Tao Ma
2011-06-09 18:27         ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-10  5:48           ` Tao Ma
2011-06-10  9:14             ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-10 10:00               ` Tao Ma
2011-06-10 15:44                 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-11  7:24                   ` Tao Ma
2011-06-13 10:08                   ` Tao Ma
2011-06-13 21:41                     ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-14  7:03                       ` Tao Ma
2011-06-14 13:30                         ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-14 15:42                           ` Tao Ma
2011-06-14 21:14                             ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-17  3:04                   ` Tao Ma
2011-06-17 12:50                     ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-17 14:34                       ` Tao Ma
2011-06-10  1:19       ` Shaohua Li
2011-06-10  1:34         ` Shaohua Li
2011-06-10  2:06           ` Tao Ma
2011-06-10  2:35             ` Shaohua Li
2011-06-10  3:02               ` Tao Ma
2011-06-10  9:20                 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-10  9:21                   ` Jens Axboe
2011-06-13  1:03                   ` Shaohua Li
2011-06-10  9:17         ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-10  9:20           ` Jens Axboe
2011-06-10  9:29             ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2011-06-10  9:31               ` 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=20110610092922.GE4183@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
    --cc=tm@tao.ma \
    /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