mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
To: Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.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: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 16:15:26 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <17888.14958.85897.289141@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45DED819.9040404@hitachi.com>

Tomoki Sekiyama writes:
 > Hi,

Hello,

 > 

[...]

 > 
 > 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?

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.

Nikita.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-02-24 13:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-02-23 12:03 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 [this message]
2007-02-27  0:52   ` Tomoki Sekiyama
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=17888.14958.85897.289141@gargle.gargle.HOWL \
    --to=nikita@clusterfs.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=soshima@redhat.com \
    --cc=tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®