Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760393AbZCXSwH (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:52:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759032AbZCXStp (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:49:45 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:22681 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753960AbZCXStm (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:49:42 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record; b=rxVdDaFTNuSLgYy1X67UrzGVLuwULjfDFgQVZ3xoASS9AJFXMAFVmBoz/6IeM3i6D ICWWfUD7/m5U8B4Dr16NQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090324183532.GG21389@redhat.com> References: <1236823015-4183-2-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> <20090312140450.GE10919@redhat.com> <49C0A171.8060009@cn.fujitsu.com> <20090318215529.GA3338@redhat.com> <20090324125842.GA21389@redhat.com> <20090324182906.GF21389@redhat.com> <20090324184101.GO18554@gandalf.sssup.it> <20090324183532.GG21389@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:49:35 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] Documentation From: Nauman Rafique To: Vivek Goyal Cc: Fabio Checconi , Gui Jianfeng , Dhaval Giani , dpshah@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, jens.axboe@oracle.com, ryov@valinux.co.jp, fernando@intellilink.co.jp, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, taka@valinux.co.jp, arozansk@redhat.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, oz-kernel@redhat.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, menage@google.com, peterz@infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1439 Lines: 39 On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 07:41:01PM +0100, Fabio Checconi wrote: >> > From: Vivek Goyal >> > Date: Tue, Mar 24, 2009 02:29:06PM -0400 >> > >> ... >> > > Does keeping the sync queue in ready tree solves the problem too? Is >> > > it because it avoid a virtual time jump? >> > > >> > >> > I have not tried the second approch yet. But that also should solve the >> > vtime jump issue. >> > >> >> Do you mean that you intend to keep a queue with no backlog in the >> active tree? > > Yes. Is it possible to keep a not-backlogged queue in the tree for later > expiry. So that we don't actively wait/idle for next request to come and > hope queue will become backlogged soon. Otherwise, it will be deleted from > the active queue. This is just a thought, I am not even sure how would it > interefere with bfq code. > > All this to solve the vtime jump issue for sync queues. If only vtime jump is an issue, can we solve it by delaying vtime jump? That is, even if we serve an entity with a bigger vtime, we don't update the reference vtime of the service tree until after some time? > > Thanks > Vivek > -- 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/