From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: "Trenton D. Adams" <trenton.d.adams@gmail.com>
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>, Hua Zhong <hzhong@gmail.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 22:02:03 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0904062156180.4010@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9b1675090904062148k7081be9bs26b5852d71a0a45c@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Trenton D. Adams wrote:
>
> What about a procfs setting instead? Is there a policy about why
> something should be in procfs or /sys, or as a kernel config option?
> That's basically as small as the patch you just made, right?
I'm never really against making things dynamically tunable, but this
already was, and that wasn't really the issue.
Sure, you can just re-mount your filesystem with different options. That's
what I did while testing - my /home is on a drive of its own, so I would
just log out and as root unmount and re-mount with data=ordered/writeback,
and log in and test again.
So dynamic tuning is good. But at the same time, having a tuning option is
_never_ an excuse for not getting the default right in the first place.
It's just a cop-out to say "hey, the default may be wrong for you, but you
can always tune it locally with XYZ".
The thing is, almost nobody does that. Partly because it needs effort and
knowledge, partly because after a few years the number of tuning knobs are
in the hundreds for every little thing.
So instead, leave the tuning for the _really_ odd cases (if you use your
machine as an IP router, you hopefully know enough to tune it if you
really care). Not for random general-purpose "use for whatever" kind of
thing.
> I'm just thinking that something like this, where people want one
> thing or the other, but may not know it when they install Linux, might
> like to change it realtime. Especially if they are a Linux newbie,
> and don't know how to compile their own kernel. Or don't have time to
> maintain their own kernel installs.
Oh absolutely. I'm not expecting people to compile their own kernels. I'm
expecting that within a few months, most modern distributions will have
(almost by mistake) gotten a new set of saner defaults, and anybody who
keeps their machine up-to-date will see a smoother experience without ever
even realizing _why_.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-07 5:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-06 12:48 Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 1/8] block: change the request allocation/congestion logic to be sync/async based Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 2/8] Add WRITE_SYNC_PLUG and SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 3/8] block: fsync_buffers_list() should use SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 4/8] jbd: use WRITE_SYNC_PLUG instead of WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 5/8] jbd2: " Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 6/8] block: enabling plugging on SSD devices that don't do queuing Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 7/8] block: Add flag for telling the IO schedulers NOT to anticipate more IO Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 8/8] block: switch sync_dirty_buffer() over to WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:04 ` [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:13 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 15:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 16:57 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-07 3:28 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-06 15:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 15:10 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 15:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 17:01 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 18:31 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:26 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 20:12 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:19 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 21:35 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:04 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 23:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 7:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2009-04-07 10:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-07 14:10 ` Diego Calleja
2009-04-08 12:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-08 12:56 ` Denys Vlasenko
2009-04-08 13:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-07 13:35 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 14:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 19:24 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 19:45 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-04-07 20:53 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-04-09 2:40 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-04-09 14:01 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-04-06 22:25 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:48 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:52 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 23:19 ` Alan Cox
2009-04-07 3:52 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-07 4:13 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 4:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 4:48 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 5:02 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2009-04-07 5:23 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-07 6:27 ` Trenton D. Adams
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.0904062156180.4010@localhost.localdomain \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=hzhong@gmail.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trenton.d.adams@gmail.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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