From: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>
To: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Cc: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Deadline for video capture
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 09:28:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <400FDDF8.4080600@techsource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <400F5CE5.6000602@cyberone.com.au>
Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>
> Con Kolivas wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hi all
>>
>> I suspected that the anticipatory scheduler might not have been the
>> best choice for video capture because of the interruption to writes by
>> reads and the subsequent anticipatory delay associated with it. I
>> have now confirmed that booting with the default anticipatory i/o
>> elevator I get many dropped frames that I don't get if I boot with
>> elevator=deadline.
>> briefly: dual 7200 rpm ATA5 IDE drives in software RAID0
>>
>> I guess there isn't really a lot to do about this, it's a compromise
>> one way or the other. The anticipatory scheduler seems better all
>> round but in this large streaming write situation it doesn't seem
>> ideal. Any sysctl settings I could use to blunt the anticipation just
>> before I do video capture?
>>
>
> echo 0 > /sys/block/*/queue/iosched/antic_expire
> Turns it off alltogether.
>
> You could also adjust read and write batch expire settings which are
> heavily biased toward reads.
Please excuse my potentially very stupid questions....
In AS, are there any sorts of "pressure levels" which indicate how many
read and write blocks are pending? Perhaps AS itself could be modified
to strongly favor writes once some water mark of available pages (page
cache, right?) has been reached.
The main idea behind AS is to increase throughput at the expense of
additional latency. It certainly wouldn't hurt us if occasionally there
was a sudden burst of well-ordered writes.
I'm assuming that AS attempts to order reads and writes in ascending
block number, right? Why not order I/O's by ascending block number
regardless of whether they're reads or writes, especially when the write
pressure reaches a certain point?
Also, what kind of other system load was going on when the capture was
happening? A kernel compile? Is there any feedback from the process
scheduler to AS which indicates that an interactive task is what is
doing the writes?
It seems to me that video playback would be helped by AS. If capture is
hurt by AS, that would be a shame. Who wants to have to reboot or
change /proc parameters to switch between record and playback?
But then again, anyone doing professional video editing is not likely to
be doing a kernel compile in the background. :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-22 14:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-22 5:08 Deadline for video capture Con Kolivas
2004-01-22 5:17 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-22 14:28 ` Timothy Miller [this message]
2004-01-22 15:37 ` Con Kolivas
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=400FDDF8.4080600@techsource.com \
--to=miller@techsource.com \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
/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