mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	jengelh@medozas.de, stable@kernel.org, gregkh@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: Fix broken sync writeback
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:05:43 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1002151601360.18830@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100215141750.GC3434@quack.suse.cz>



On Mon, 15 Feb 2010, Jan Kara wrote:
> 
> Personally, I don't see why VM shouldn't generate IO from a single inode
> larger than a few MB for data integrity syncs. There are two reasons I know
> about for MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES:

Two issues:
 - it shouldn't matter for performance (if you have a broken disk that 
   wants multi-megabyte writes to get good performance, you need to fix 
   the driver, not the VM)
 - I generally think that _latency_ is much more important than 
   throughput, and huge writes are simply bad for latency.

But the real complaint I had about your patch was that it made no sense. 

Your statement that it speeds up sync is indicative of some _other_ 
independent problem (perhaps starting from the beginning of the file each 
time? Who knows?) and the patch _clearly_doesn't actually address the 
underlying problem, it just changes the logic in a way that makes no 
obvious sense to anybody, without actually explaining why it would matter.

So if you can explain _why_ that patch makes such a big difference for 
you, and actually write that up, I wouldn't mind it. But right now it was 
sent as a voodoo patch with no sensible explanation for why it would 
really make any difference, since the outer loop should already do what 
the patch does.

		Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-16  0:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-12  9:16 Jens Axboe
2010-02-12 15:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-13 12:58   ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-02-15 14:49     ` Jan Kara
2010-02-15 15:41       ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-02-15 15:58         ` Jan Kara
2010-06-27 16:44         ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-10-24 23:41           ` Sync writeback still broken Jan Engelhardt
2010-10-30  0:57             ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-30  1:16               ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-30  1:30                 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-30  3:18                 ` Andrew Morton
2010-10-30 13:15                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-10-31 12:24             ` Jan Kara
2010-10-31 22:40               ` Jan Kara
2010-11-05 21:33                 ` Jan Kara
2010-11-05 21:34                   ` Jan Kara
2010-11-05 21:41                     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-11-05 22:03                   ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-11-07 12:57                     ` Jan Kara
2011-01-20 22:50                     ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-01-21 15:09                       ` Jan Kara
2010-02-15 14:17   ` [PATCH] writeback: Fix broken sync writeback Jan Kara
2010-02-16  0:05     ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2010-02-16 23:00       ` Jan Kara
2010-02-16 23:34         ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-17  0:01           ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-17  1:33           ` Jan Kara
2010-02-17  1:57             ` Dave Chinner
2010-02-17  3:35             ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-17  4:30               ` tytso
2010-02-17  5:16                 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-22 17:29                   ` Jan Kara
2010-02-22 21:01                     ` tytso
2010-02-22 22:26                       ` Jan Kara
2010-02-23  2:53                       ` Dave Chinner
2010-02-23  3:23                         ` tytso
2010-02-23  5:53                           ` Dave Chinner
2010-02-24 14:56                             ` 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=alpine.LFD.2.00.1002151601360.18830@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@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