From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] cfq-iosched: Allow sync noidle workloads to preempt each other
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:13:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160108181330.GW1898@mtj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1452180496-18483-4-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 04:28:14PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
>
> The original idea with preemption of sync noidle queues (introduced in
> commit 718eee0579b8 "cfq-iosched: fairness for sync no-idle queues") was
> that we service all sync noidle queues together, we don't idle on any of
> the queues individually and we idle only if there is no sync noidle
> queue to be served. This intention also matches the original test:
>
> if (cfqd->serving_type == SYNC_NOIDLE_WORKLOAD
> && new_cfqq->service_tree == cfqq->service_tree)
> return true;
>
> However since at that time cfqq->service_tree was not set for idling
> queues, this test was unreliable and was replaced in commit e4a229196a7c
> "cfq-iosched: fix no-idle preemption logic" by:
>
> if (cfqd->serving_type == SYNC_NOIDLE_WORKLOAD &&
> cfqq_type(new_cfqq) == SYNC_NOIDLE_WORKLOAD &&
> new_cfqq->service_tree->count == 1)
> return true;
>
> That was a reliable test but was actually doing something different -
> now we preempt sync noidle queue only if the new queue is the only one
> busy in the service tree.
>
> These days cfq queue is kept in service tree even if it is idling and
> thus the original check would be safe again. But since we actually check
> that cfq queues are in the same cgroup, of the same priority class and
> workload type (sync noidle), we know that new_cfqq is fine to preempt
> cfqq. So just remove the service tree check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-08 18:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-07 15:28 [PATCH 0/5 v2] SYNC_NOIDLE preemption for ancestor cgroups Jan Kara
2016-01-07 15:28 ` [PATCH 1/5] cfq-iosched: Don't group_idle if cfqq has big thinktime Jan Kara
2016-01-08 16:58 ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-11 15:40 ` Jan Kara
2016-01-07 15:28 ` [PATCH 2/5] cfq-iosched: Reorder checks in cfq_should_preempt() Jan Kara
2016-01-08 16:59 ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-07 15:28 ` [PATCH 3/5] cfq-iosched: Allow sync noidle workloads to preempt each other Jan Kara
2016-01-08 18:13 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2016-01-07 15:28 ` [PATCH 4/5] cgroup: Export cgroup_is_descendant() Jan Kara
2016-01-08 18:15 ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-07 15:28 ` [PATCH 5/5] cfq-iosched: Allow parent cgroup to preempt its child Jan Kara
2016-01-08 18:17 ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-12 15:24 [PATCH 0/5 v3] SYNC_NOIDLE preemption for ancestor cgroups Jan Kara
2016-01-12 15:24 ` [PATCH 3/5] cfq-iosched: Allow sync noidle workloads to preempt each other Jan Kara
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=20160108181330.GW1898@mtj.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=jack@suse.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome