Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756575AbYARISb (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:18:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751607AbYARISZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:18:25 -0500 Received: from smtp.ustc.edu.cn ([202.38.64.16]:33630 "HELO ustc.edu.cn" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751017AbYARISY (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:18:24 -0500 Message-ID: <400644314.11994@ustc.edu.cn> X-EYOUMAIL-SMTPAUTH: wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:01:14 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu To: Andi Kleen Cc: Michael Rubin , a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [patch] Converting writeback linked lists to a tree based data structure References: <20080115080921.70E3810653@localhost> <400562938.07583@ustc.edu.cn> <532480950801171307q4b540ewa3acb6bfbea5dbc8@mail.gmail.com> <400632190.14601@ustc.edu.cn> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-GPG-Fingerprint: 53D2 DDCE AB5C 8DC6 188B 1CB1 F766 DA34 8D8B 1C6D User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1537 Lines: 35 On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:41:09AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > Fengguang Wu writes: > > > > Suppose we want to grant longer expiration window for temp files, > > adding a new list named s_dirty_tmpfile would be a handy solution. > > How would the kernel know that a file is a tmp file? No idea - but it makes a good example ;-) But for those making different filesystems for /tmp, /var, /data etc, per-superblock expiration parameters may help. > > So the question is: should we need more than 3 QoS classes? > > [just a random idea; i have not worked out all the implications] > > Would it be possible to derive a writeback apriority from the ionice > level of the process originating the IO? e.g. we have long standing > problems that background jobs even when niced and can cause > significant slow downs to foreground processes by starving IO > and pushing out pages. ionice was supposed to help with that > but in practice it does not seem to have helped too much and I suspect > it needs more prioritization higher up the VM food chain. Adding > such priorities to writeback would seem like a step in the right > direction, although it would of course not solve the problem > completely. Good idea. Michael may well be considering similar interfaces :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/