From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Justin M. Forbes" <jforbes@fedoraproject.org>,
"v4.0" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: loop: avoiding too many pending per work I/O
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 12:59:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <x49zj5pft68.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACVXFVO+qZZAbMGFNqTqVxzPEwXN5+wd3Z=CtvL6Nxr=w_Q4Ww@mail.gmail.com> (Ming Lei's message of "Wed, 29 Apr 2015 12:57:27 +0800")
Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:36 AM, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com> writes:
>>
>>> If there are too many pending per work I/O, too many
>>> high priority work thread can be generated so that
>>> system performance can be effected.
>>>
>>> This patch limits the max pending per work I/O as 16,
>>> and will fackback to single queue mode when the max
>>> number is reached.
>>
>> Actually, it limits it to 32. Also, there is no discussion on what
>> variables might affect this number. Will that magic number change
>> depending on the number of cpus on the system, for example?
>
> My fault, it should have been 16.
>
> It is just used to keep more IOs in flight, but can't cause obvious
> costs like the case of Fedora live booting.
>
> IMO, it shouldn't depend much on number of CPUs, and more
> related with I/O performance of the backing file, and the number
> is like 'iodepth' of fio.
OK, that makes more sense. I'm still not a huge fan of hard-coding
numbers that are storage-specific, but I don't have a better suggestion
at the moment, either.
Cheers,
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-30 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-28 15:37 Ming Lei
2015-04-28 16:36 ` Jeff Moyer
2015-04-29 4:57 ` Ming Lei
2015-04-30 16:59 ` Jeff Moyer [this message]
2015-05-01 1:20 ` Ming Lei
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=x49zj5pft68.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com \
--to=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=jforbes@fedoraproject.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=stable@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®