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
next prev 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).