Re: [PATCH] mm: readahead: remove redundant ra_pages in file_ra_state

YingHang Zhu
2012-10-25T03:12:36Z

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Chen,
>
>> But how can bdi related ra_pages reflect different files' readahead
>> window? Maybe these different files are sequential read, random read
>> and so on.
>
> It's simple: sequential reads will get ra_pages readahead size while
> random reads will not get readahead at all.
>
> Talking about the below chunk, it might hurt someone that explicitly
> takes advantage of the behavior, however the ra_pages*2 seems more
> like a hack than general solution to me: if the user will need
> POSIX_FADV_SEQUENTIAL to double the max readahead window size for
> improving IO performance, then why not just increase bdi->ra_pages and
> benefit all reads? One may argue that it offers some differential
> behavior to specific applications, however it may also present as a
> counter-optimization: if the root already tuned bdi->ra_pages to the
> optimal size, the doubled readahead size will only cost more memory
> and perhaps IO latency.
I agree, we should choose the reasonable solution here.

Thanks,
Ying Zhu
>
> --- a/mm/fadvise.c
> +++ b/mm/fadvise.c
> @@ -87,7 +86,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE(fadvise64_64)(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len, int advice)
> spin_unlock(&file->f_lock);
> break;
> case POSIX_FADV_SEQUENTIAL:
> - file->f_ra.ra_pages = bdi->ra_pages * 2;
> spin_lock(&file->f_lock);
> file->f_mode &= ~FMODE_RANDOM;
> spin_unlock(&file->f_lock);
>
> Thanks,
> Fengguang