I'm happy to say that rmap12c has huge preformance improvements over
rmap11c with my Pentium 200Mhz w/64MB ram.
Some of the differences:
rmap11c: slow redrawing of mozilla, mouse hangs, system sluggishness.
rmap12c: no slow redrawing UNLESS heavy I/O & swapping is occuring. System
is able to handle heavy heavy memory usage (mozilla + evolution +
blowup-xfs - fsx-linux.c to test XFS's stability with VM).
Also, XFS so far is preforming without file corruption that I can see.
a patch will be available for this shortly on my website for those who
want XFS + rmap12c.
Shawn.
Is that http://www.sh0n.net/~spstarr/ ?
On 02/06, Shawn Starr said something like:
> a patch will be available for this shortly on my website for those who
> want XFS + rmap12c.
>
> Shawn.
--
Shawn Leas
[email protected]
I installed a skylight in my apartment...
The people who live above me are furious!
-- Stephen Wright
a mirror site has sprung up it will be on xfs.sh0n.net when the site is up
later today. I'll update the list with that info after.
On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Shawn wrote:
> Is that http://www.sh0n.net/~spstarr/ ?
>
> On 02/06, Shawn Starr said something like:
> > a patch will be available for this shortly on my website for those who
> > want XFS + rmap12c.
> >
> > Shawn.
> --
> Shawn Leas
> [email protected]
>
> I installed a skylight in my apartment...
> The people who live above me are furious!
> -- Stephen Wright
>
>
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 02:17:28AM -0500, Shawn Starr wrote:
> I'm happy to say that rmap12c has huge preformance improvements over
> rmap11c with my Pentium 200Mhz w/64MB ram.
>
> Some of the differences:
>
> rmap11c: slow redrawing of mozilla, mouse hangs, system sluggishness.
>
> rmap12c: no slow redrawing UNLESS heavy I/O & swapping is occuring. System
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Would you try the ChangeSet 1.188, specifically the one for
fs/[email protected]?
http://linuxvm.bkbits.net:8088/vm-2.4/diffs/fs/[email protected]?nav=index.html|ChangeSet@-2d|[email protected]
I agree that rmap12c + the above fix has noticeable improvements over
the 11 series. I'll be pushing some numbers out later today.
--
Dan Chen [email protected]
GPG key: http://www.unc.edu/~crimsun/pubkey.gpg.asc
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 02:17:28AM -0500, Shawn Starr wrote:
>> I'm happy to say that rmap12c has huge preformance improvements over
>> rmap11c with my Pentium 200Mhz w/64MB ram.
>> Some of the differences:
>> rmap11c: slow redrawing of mozilla, mouse hangs, system sluggishness.
>> rmap12c: no slow redrawing UNLESS heavy I/O & swapping is occuring. System
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 04:13:38AM -0500, Dan Chen wrote:
> Would you try the ChangeSet 1.188, specifically the one for
> fs/[email protected]?
> http://linuxvm.bkbits.net:8088/vm-2.4/diffs/fs/[email protected]?nav=index.html|ChangeSet@-2d|[email protected]
>
> I agree that rmap12c + the above fix has noticeable improvements over
> the 11 series. I'll be pushing some numbers out later today.
That patch is:
--- 1.51/fs/buffer.c Wed Jan 23 15:29:44 2002
+++ 1.52/fs/buffer.c Mon Feb 4 05:08:59 2002
@@ -2933,7 +2933,6 @@
spin_lock(&lru_list_lock);
if (!write_some_buffers(NODEV) || balance_dirty_state() < 0) {
- wait_for_some_buffers(NODEV);
interruptible_sleep_on(&bdflush_wait);
}
}
@@ -2964,7 +2964,6 @@
complete((struct completion *)startup);
for (;;) {
- wait_for_some_buffers(NODEV);
/* update interval */
interval = bdf_prm.b_un.interval;
I think I already sent him that, along with the following, which updates
rmap to akpm's read-latency-2.
Cheers,
Bill
diff -urN linux-virgin/drivers/block/elevator.c linux-wli/drivers/block/elevator.c
--- linux-virgin/drivers/block/elevator.c Mon Feb 4 17:12:08 2002
+++ linux-wli/drivers/block/elevator.c Tue Feb 5 17:31:24 2002
@@ -80,31 +80,38 @@
struct buffer_head *bh, int rw,
int max_sectors)
{
- struct list_head *entry = &q->queue_head;
- unsigned int count = bh->b_size >> 9, ret = ELEVATOR_NO_MERGE;
+ struct list_head *entry;
+ unsigned int count = bh->b_size >> 9;
+ unsigned int ret = ELEVATOR_NO_MERGE;
+ int merge_only = 0;
const int max_bomb_segments = q->elevator.max_bomb_segments;
-
+
+ entry = &q->queue_head;
while ((entry = entry->prev) != head) {
struct request *__rq = blkdev_entry_to_request(entry);
- /*
- * simply "aging" of requests in queue
- */
- if (__rq->elevator_sequence-- <= 0)
- break;
-
+ if (__rq->elevator_sequence-- <= 0) {
+ /*
+ * OK, we've exceeded someone's latency limit.
+ * But we still continue to look for merges,
+ * because they're so much better than seeks.
+ */
+ merge_only = 1;
+ }
if (__rq->waiting)
continue;
if (__rq->rq_dev != bh->b_rdev)
continue;
- if (!*req && bh_rq_in_between(bh, __rq, &q->queue_head))
+ if (!*req && !merge_only &&
+ bh_rq_in_between(bh, __rq, &q->queue_head)) {
*req = __rq;
+ }
if (__rq->cmd != rw)
continue;
if (__rq->nr_sectors + count > max_sectors)
continue;
if (__rq->elevator_sequence < count)
- break;
+ merge_only = 1;
if (__rq->sector + __rq->nr_sectors == bh->b_rsector) {
ret = ELEVATOR_BACK_MERGE;
*req = __rq;
diff -urN linux-virgin/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c linux-wli/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c
--- linux-virgin/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c Mon Feb 4 17:11:27 2002
+++ linux-wli/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c Tue Feb 5 17:31:24 2002
@@ -1095,7 +1095,7 @@
int __init blk_dev_init(void)
{
struct blk_dev_struct *dev;
- int total_ram;
+ int total_ram; /* kilobytes */
request_cachep = kmem_cache_create("blkdev_requests",
sizeof(struct request),
@@ -1117,9 +1117,11 @@
* Free request slots per queue.
* (Half for reads, half for writes)
*/
- queue_nr_requests = 64;
- if (total_ram > MB(32))
- queue_nr_requests = 128;
+ queue_nr_requests = (total_ram >> 9) & ~15; /* One per half-megabyte */
+ if (queue_nr_requests < 32)
+ queue_nr_requests = 32;
+ if (queue_nr_requests > 1024)
+ queue_nr_requests = 1024;
/*
* Batch frees according to queue length
Yes, I'll apply this diff to my tree when I get home today.
On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 04:13, Dan Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 02:17:28AM -0500, Shawn Starr wrote:
> > I'm happy to say that rmap12c has huge preformance improvements over
> > rmap11c with my Pentium 200Mhz w/64MB ram.
> >
> > Some of the differences:
> >
> > rmap11c: slow redrawing of mozilla, mouse hangs, system sluggishness.
> >
> > rmap12c: no slow redrawing UNLESS heavy I/O & swapping is occuring. System
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Would you try the ChangeSet 1.188, specifically the one for
> fs/[email protected]?
> http://linuxvm.bkbits.net:8088/vm-2.4/diffs/fs/[email protected]?nav=index.html|ChangeSet@-2d|[email protected]
>
> I agree that rmap12c + the above fix has noticeable improvements over
> the 11 series. I'll be pushing some numbers out later today.
>
> --
> Dan Chen [email protected]
> GPG key: http://www.unc.edu/~crimsun/pubkey.gpg.asc