linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Munehiro Ikeda <m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com>
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@redhat.com,
	jens.axboe@oracle.com, nauman@google.com, dpshah@google.com,
	lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com,
	paolo.valente@unimore.it, ryov@valinux.co.jp,
	fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com,
	taka@valinux.co.jp, jmoyer@redhat.com, dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, righi.andrea@gmail.com,
	jbaron@redhat.com, agk@redhat.com, snitzer@redhat.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io-controller: implement per group request allocation limitation
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 14:38:35 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A77D76B.3090502@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A77964A.7040602@ds.jp.nec.com>

Munehiro Ikeda wrote:
...
> 
> Consideration and Conclusion
> =============================
> 
>  From result(1), it is observed that it takes 1000~1200[ms] to rise P2
> bandwidth.  In result(2), where both of g1 and g2 have
> nr_group_requests=100, the delay gets longer as 1800~2000[ms].  In
> addition to it, the average bandwidth becomes ~5% lower than result(1). 
> This is supposed that P2 couldn't allocate enough requests.
> Then, result(3) shows that bandwidth of P2 can rise quickly (~300[ms])
> if nr_group_requests can be set per-cgroup.  Result(4) shows that the
> delay can be shortened by setting g2 as RT class, however, the delay is
> still longer than result(3).
> 
> I think it is confirmed that "per-cgroup nr_requests limitation is
> useful in a certain situation".  Beyond that, the discussion topic is
> the benefit pointed out above is eligible for the complication of the
> implementation.  IMHO, I don't think the implementation of per-cgroup
> request limitation is too complicated to accept.  On the other hand I
> guess it suddenly gets complicated if we try to implement further more,
> especially hierarchical support.  It is also true that I have a feeling
> that implementation without per-device limitation and hierarchical
> support is like "unfinished work".
> 
> So, my opinion so far is that, per-cgroup nr_requests limitation should
> be merged only if hierarchical support is concluded "unnecessary" for
> it.  If merging it tempts hierarchical support, it shouldn't be.
> How about your opinion, all?

  Hi Munehiro-san,

  Thanks for the great job. It seems Per-cgroup requests allocation limits
  has its value in some cases. IMHO, for the time being, we can just drop
  the hierarchical support for "Per-cgroup requests allocation limits", and
  see whether it can work well.

> 
> My considerations or verification method might be wrong.  Please correct
> them if any.  And if you have any other idea of scenario to verify the
> effect of per-cgroup nr_requests limitation, please let me know.  I'll
> try it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 

-- 
Regards
Gui Jianfeng


  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-04  6:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-02 20:01 [RFC] IO scheduler based IO controller V6 Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 01/25] io-controller: Documentation Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 02/25] io-controller: Core of the B-WF2Q+ scheduler Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 03/25] io-controller: bfq support of in-class preemption Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 04/25] io-controller: Common flat fair queuing code in elevaotor layer Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 05/25] io-controller: Charge for time slice based on average disk rate Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 06/25] io-controller: Modify cfq to make use of flat elevator fair queuing Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 07/25] io-controller: core bfq scheduler changes for hierarchical setup Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 08/25] io-controller: cgroup related changes for hierarchical group support Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 09/25] io-controller: Common hierarchical fair queuing code in elevaotor layer Vivek Goyal
2009-07-06  2:46   ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-06 14:16     ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-07  1:40       ` [PATCH] io-controller: Get rid of css id from io cgroup Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-08 14:04         ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 10/25] io-controller: cfq changes to use hierarchical fair queuing code in elevaotor layer Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 11/25] io-controller: Export disk time used and nr sectors dipatched through cgroups Vivek Goyal
2009-07-08  2:16   ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-08 14:00     ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 12/25] io-controller: idle for sometime on sync queue before expiring it Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 13/25] io-controller: Wait for requests to complete from last queue before new queue is scheduled Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:09   ` Nauman Rafique
2009-07-02 20:17     ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 14/25] io-controller: Separate out queue and data Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 15/25] io-conroller: Prepare elevator layer for single queue schedulers Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 16/25] io-controller: noop changes for hierarchical fair queuing Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 17/25] io-controller: deadline " Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 18/25] io-controller: anticipatory " Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 19/25] blkio_cgroup patches from Ryo to track async bios Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 20/25] io-controller: map async requests to appropriate cgroup Vivek Goyal
2009-08-03  2:13   ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-08-04  1:25     ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 21/25] io-controller: Per cgroup request descriptor support Vivek Goyal
2009-07-08  3:27   ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-08 13:57     ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-21  5:37   ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-21  5:55     ` Nauman Rafique
2009-07-21 14:01       ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-21 17:57         ` Nauman Rafique
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 22/25] io-controller: Per io group bdi congestion interface Vivek Goyal
2009-07-17  0:16   ` Munehiro Ikeda
2009-07-17 13:52     ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 23/25] io-controller: Support per cgroup per device weights and io class Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 24/25] io-controller: Debug hierarchical IO scheduling Vivek Goyal
2009-07-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 25/25] io-controller: experimental debug patch for async queue wait before expiry Vivek Goyal
2009-07-08  3:56 ` [RFC] IO scheduler based IO controller V6 Balbir Singh
2009-07-08 13:41   ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-08 14:39     ` Balbir Singh
2009-07-09  1:58       ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-10  1:56 ` [PATCH] io-controller: implement per group request allocation limitation Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-13 16:03   ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-13 21:08     ` Munehiro Ikeda
2009-07-14  7:45       ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-08-04  2:00         ` Munehiro Ikeda
2009-08-04  6:38           ` Gui Jianfeng [this message]
2009-08-04 22:37           ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-14  7:37     ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-08-04  2:02   ` Munehiro Ikeda
2009-08-04  6:41     ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-08-04  2:04   ` Munehiro Ikeda
2009-08-04  6:45     ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-27  2:10 ` [RFC] IO scheduler based IO controller V6 Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-27 12:55   ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-28  3:27     ` Vivek Goyal
2009-07-28  3:36       ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-28 11:36     ` Gui Jianfeng
2009-07-29  9:07     ` Gui Jianfeng

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=4A77D76B.3090502@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --to=guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=dpshah@google.com \
    --cc=fchecconi@gmail.com \
    --cc=fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp \
    --cc=jbaron@redhat.com \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=mikew@google.com \
    --cc=nauman@google.com \
    --cc=paolo.valente@unimore.it \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=righi.andrea@gmail.com \
    --cc=ryov@valinux.co.jp \
    --cc=s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
    --cc=taka@valinux.co.jp \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).