Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756409AbYJIDji (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Oct 2008 23:39:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754741AbYJIDj3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Oct 2008 23:39:29 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:59087 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754580AbYJIDj2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Oct 2008 23:39:28 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 20:38:27 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Theodore Tso Cc: Arjan van de Ven , Jens Axboe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Give kjournald a IOPRIO_CLASS_RT io priority Message-Id: <20081008203827.f5897459.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20081009030054.GD17512@mit.edu> References: <20081001235501.2b7f50fe.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081002061236.3c71c877@infradead.org> <20081002132457.46ad8d05.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081002210117.0f5062f7@infradead.org> <20081002212355.621a4fb6@infradead.org> <20081002214000.89420bb3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081002214353.30873f98@infradead.org> <20081002215026.a63ba0d0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081002220040.7963596c@infradead.org> <20081002222438.8f9f90a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081009030054.GD17512@mit.edu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1821 Lines: 48 On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 23:00:54 -0400 Theodore Tso wrote: > On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 10:24:38PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > Mount a junk partition with `-oakpm' and run some benchmarks. If the > > results are "wow" then it's worth spending time on. If the results are > > "meh" then we can not bother.. > > > > I've ported the patch to the ext4 filesystem, and dropped it into the > unstable portion of the ext4 patch queue. Useful, thanks. > If we can get someone (hi, > Ric!) to run fs_mark with and without -o akpm_lock_hack, I suspect we > will find that it makes quite a large difference on that particular > benchmark, since it is fsync-heavy to force a large number of > transaction, and the creation of the inodes should cause multiple > blocks that will be entangled between the current and committing > transactions. > fsync? Yes, I suppose so. Repeated modifications to the same inodes/directories/bitmaps blocks/etc will hurt. A quick test on other quantified workloads would be useful too. If the results look promising then someone(tm) will need to work out how to fix this for real. > > ext4: akpm's locking hack to fix locking delays > > This is a port of the following patch from Andrew Morton to ext4: > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/10/3/22 > > This fixes a major contention problem in do_get_write_access() when a > buffer is modified in both the current and committing transaction. More specifically: "under checkpoint writeback in the committing transaction when the committing transaction requests write access". -- 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/