On Sun 06-02-11 19:54:37, Boaz Harrosh wrote:

On 02/04/2011 03:38 AM, Jan Kara wrote:

quoted

The basic idea (implemented in the third patch) is that processes throttled
in balance_dirty_pages() wait for enough IO to complete. The waiting is
implemented as follows: Whenever we decide to throttle a task in
balance_dirty_pages(), task adds itself to a list of tasks that are throttled
against that bdi and goes to sleep waiting to receive specified amount of page
IO completions. Once in a while (currently HZ/10, in patch 5 the interval is
autotuned based on observed IO rate), accumulated page IO completions are
distributed equally among waiting tasks.

This waiting scheme has been chosen so that waiting time in
balance_dirty_pages() is proportional to
  number_waited_pages * number_of_waiters.
In particular it does not depend on the total number of pages being waited for,
thus providing possibly a fairer results.

I gave the patches some basic testing (multiple parallel dd's to a single
drive) and they seem to work OK. The dd's get equal share of the disk
throughput (about 10.5 MB/s, which is nice result given the disk can do
about 87 MB/s when writing single-threaded), and dirty limit does not get
exceeded. Of course much more testing needs to be done but I hope it's fine
for the first posting :).

So what is the disposition of Wu's patches in light of these ones?
* Do they replace Wu's, or Wu's just get rebased ontop of these at a
  later stage?

  They are meant as a replacement.

* Did you find any hard problems with Wu's patches that delay them for
  a long time?

  Wu himself wrote that the current patchset probably won't fly because it
fluctuates too much. So he decided to try to rewrite patches from per-bdi
limits to global limits when he has time...

* Some of the complicated stuff in Wu's patches are the statistics and
  rate control mechanics. Are these the troubled area? Because some of
  these are actually some things that I'm interested in, and that appeal
  to me the most.

  Basically yes, this logic seems to be the problematic one.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara [off-list ref]
SUSE Labs, CR

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>