Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932108AbZDHGVP (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Apr 2009 02:21:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758758AbZDHGU7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Apr 2009 02:20:59 -0400 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([93.163.65.50]:47799 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758594AbZDHGU6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Apr 2009 02:20:58 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 08:20:57 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Wu Fengguang Cc: Jos Houtman , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads Message-ID: <20090408062056.GP5178@kernel.dk> References: <20090408004410.GA18679@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090408004410.GA18679@localhost> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1698 Lines: 50 On Wed, Apr 08 2009, Wu Fengguang wrote: > [CC Jens] > > On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 10:03:38PM +0800, Jos Houtman wrote: > > > > I tried the write-back branch from the 2.6-block tree. > > > > And I can atleast confirm that it works, atleast in relation to the > > writeback not keeping up when the device was congested before it wrote a > > 1024 pages. > > > > See: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/22/83 for a bit more information. > > Hi Jos, you said that this simple patch solved the problem, however you > mentioned somehow suboptimal performance. Can you elaborate that? So > that I can push or improve it. > > Thanks, > Fengguang > --- > fs/fs-writeback.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > --- mm.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c > +++ mm/fs/fs-writeback.c > @@ -325,7 +325,8 @@ __sync_single_inode(struct inode *inode, > * soon as the queue becomes uncongested. > */ > inode->i_state |= I_DIRTY_PAGES; > - if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0) { > + if (wbc->nr_to_write <= 0 || > + wbc->encountered_congestion) { > /* > * slice used up: queue for next turn > */ > > > But the second problem seen in that thread, a write-starve-read problem does > > not seem to solved. In this problem the writes of the writeback algorithm > > starve the ongoing reads, no matter what io-scheduler is picked. What kind of SSD drive are you using? Does it support queuing or not? -- Jens Axboe -- 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/