linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To: Chao Fan <fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<peterz@infradead.org>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	<izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>, Cao Jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Change the document about iowait
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 08:47:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161113084755.0eeb4ad4@lwn.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1477449688-19397-1-git-send-email-fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>

On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:41:28 +0800
Chao Fan <fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> The iowait is not reliable by reading from /proc/stat, so this
> method to get iowait is not suggested. And we mark it in the
> document.

Sorry for the delay on this.  Life has been...challenging...

> Signed-off-by: Cao Jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Fan <fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>

What does this signoff chain mean?  

> ---
>  Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt | 11 ++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt
> index 74329fd..71f5096 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt
> @@ -1305,7 +1305,16 @@ second).  The meanings of the columns are as follows, from left to right:
>  - nice: niced processes executing in user mode
>  - system: processes executing in kernel mode
>  - idle: twiddling thumbs
> -- iowait: waiting for I/O to complete
> +- iowait: In a word, iowait stands for waiting for I/O to complete. But there
> +  are several problems:
> +  1. Cpu will not wait for I/O to complete, iowait is the time that a task is
> +     waiting for I/O to complete. When cpu goes into idle state for
> +     outstanding task io, another task will be scheduled on this CPU.
> +  2. In a multi-core CPU, the task waiting for I/O to complete is not running
> +     on any CPU, so the iowait of each CPU is difficult to calculate.
> +  3. The value of iowait field in /proc/stat will decrease in certain
> +     conditions.
> +  So, the iowait is not reliable by reading from /proc/stat.
>  - irq: servicing interrupts

So I suppose I can apply this.  But is there any chance of making it say
what iowait actually measures, rather than just saying that it's
unreliable? 

Thanks,

jon

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-11-13 15:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-26  2:41 [PATCH] Change the document about iowait Chao Fan
2016-11-09  1:33 ` Chao Fan
2016-11-13 15:47 ` Jonathan Corbet [this message]
2016-11-14  3:42   ` Chao Fan
2016-11-19 17:39     ` Jonathan Corbet

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=20161113084755.0eeb4ad4@lwn.net \
    --to=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).