mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rjw@sisk.pl, jack@suse.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix congestion_wait() sync/async vs read/write confusion
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:44:19 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090714114419.GA17633@duck.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090708191238.GE18008@think>

On Wed 08-07-09 15:12:38, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 08:47:03PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > This one isn't great, we currently have broken congestion wait logic in
> > the kernel. 2.6.30 is impacted as well, so this patch should go to
> > stable too once it's in -git. I'll let this one simmer until tomorrow,
> > then ask Linus to pull it. The offending commit breaking this is
> > 1faa16d22877f4839bd433547d770c676d1d964c.
> > 
> > Meanwhile, it could potentially cause buffered writeout slowdowns in the
> > kernel. Perhaps the 2.6.30 regression in that area is caused by this?
> > Would be interesting if the submitter could test. I can't find the list,
> > CC'ing Rafael.
> 
> Even if this does slow down some workloads, the bug is not in using the
> correct flag ;) So, I'd ack this one.
> 
> Jan Kara was able to reproduce the tiobench 2.6.30 regression, so I've
> cc'd him and kept the patch below.
  Thanks for the patch Chris. I've remeasured tiobench with the 2.6.30 +
the fix but it didn't help (which is not too surprising as what I observe
is most likely CFQ related as there's no regression with NOOP scheduler).
  Just to recall:
    2.6.29 (CFQ)           Avg    StdDev
8   38.01 40.26 39.69 ->  39.32  0.955092
16  40.09 38.18 40.05 ->  39.44  0.891104

    2.6.30-rc8 (CFQ)
8   36.67 36.81 38.20 ->  37.23  0.69062
16  37.45 36.47 37.46 ->  37.13  0.464351

    2.6.30-rc8+fix (CFQ)
8   37.56 37.38 37.98 ->  37.64  0.251396
16  38.11 36.71 37.18 ->  37.33  0.581741

  So with the fix there's no statistically significant difference and we
are still below 2.6.29 results. I'm now going to retest with the WRITE_SYNC
changes reverted.

									Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-14 11:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-08 18:47 Jens Axboe
2009-07-08 19:12 ` Chris Mason
2009-07-14 11:44   ` Jan Kara [this message]
2009-07-14 13:12     ` Chris Mason
2009-07-14 14:40       ` Jan Kara
2009-07-08 19:15 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-07-08 22:35 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-07-08 22:44   ` Trond Myklebust
2009-07-09 12:47     ` Jens Axboe
2009-07-09 14:02     ` Christoph Hellwig

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=20090714114419.GA17633@duck.suse.cz \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    /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®