From: Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com>
To: Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
miklos@szeredi.hu, yumiko.sugita.yf@hitachi.com,
masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com, hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com,
yuji.kakutani.uw@hitachi.com, soshima@redhat.com,
haoki@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] VM throttling: avoid blocking occasional writers
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 09:52:42 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45E380DA.6090509@hitachi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17888.14958.85897.289141@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Hi Nikita,
thanks for your comments.
Nikita Danilov wrote:
>> While Dirty+Writeback pages get more than 40% of memory, process-B is
>> blocked in balance_dirty_pages() until writeback of some (`write_chunk',
>> typically = 1536) dirty pages on disk-b is started.
>
> May be the simpler solution is to use separate variables to control
> ratelimit and write chunk?
No, I think it's difficult to throttle total Dirty+Writeback only with
write_chunk, because write_chunk just affects Dirty and Writeback of
each device (in this case, throttling is done in write-requests queue of
the each backing device, as I said in another mail).
Throttling of the total Dirty+Writeback should be also done in VM itself,
and to control that, I added `dirty_limit_ratio.'
> writeback_set_ratelimit() adjusts ratelimit_pages to avoid too frequent
> calls to balance_dirty_pages(), but once we are inside of
> writeback_inodes(), there is no need to write especially many pages in
> one go: overhead of any additional looping is negligible, when compared
> with the cost of writing.
>
> Speaking of which, now that expensive get_writeback_state() is gone from
> page-writeback.c why do we need adjustable ratelimiting at all? It looks
> like writeback_set_ratelimit() can be dropped, and fixed ratelimit used
> instead.
As far as I can see, adjustable ratelimiting is the actual cause of the
long wait on writing to disk with light load.
I think removing adjustable ratelimiting should be done in another patch...
Regards
--
Tomoki Sekiyama
Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-27 0:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-23 12:03 [RFC][PATCH 0/3] VM throttling: avoid blocking occasional writers Tomoki Sekiyama
2007-02-24 4:46 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-02-27 0:50 ` Tomoki Sekiyama
2007-02-27 1:39 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-03-02 1:26 ` Tomoki Sekiyama
2007-02-24 13:15 ` Nikita Danilov
2007-02-27 0:52 ` Tomoki Sekiyama [this message]
2007-03-01 12:47 ` Leroy van Logchem
2007-03-02 9:16 ` Brice Figureau
2007-03-02 13:06 ` Leroy van Logchem
2007-03-02 16:04 ` Brice Figureau
2007-03-07 13:53 ` Yuji Kakutani
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=45E380DA.6090509@hitachi.com \
--to=tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=haoki@redhat.com \
--cc=hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=nikita@clusterfs.com \
--cc=soshima@redhat.com \
--cc=yuji.kakutani.uw@hitachi.com \
--cc=yumiko.sugita.yf@hitachi.com \
/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