Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755647AbZJBQDe (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Oct 2009 12:03:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755084AbZJBQDe (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Oct 2009 12:03:34 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:42064 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751657AbZJBQDd (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Oct 2009 12:03:33 -0400 X-Authenticated: #14349625 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19GLqh7Yr1GRtfMRegtqCrBvv8AC5YVERactp3Nyz Iox365saeCbsJv Subject: Re: IO scheduler based IO controller V10 From: Mike Galbraith To: Vivek Goyal Cc: Corrado Zoccolo , Jens Axboe , Ingo Molnar , Ulrich Lukas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, nauman@google.com, dpshah@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, ryov@valinux.co.jp, fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp, jmoyer@redhat.com, dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, righi.andrea@gmail.com, m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com, agk@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org, jmarchan@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, riel@redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20091002154020.GC4494@redhat.com> References: <200910021255.27689.czoccolo@gmail.com> <20091002124921.GA4494@redhat.com> <4e5e476b0910020827s23e827b1n847c64e355999d4a@mail.gmail.com> <1254497520.10392.11.camel@marge.simson.net> <20091002154020.GC4494@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 18:03:29 +0200 Message-Id: <1254499409.20436.3.camel@marge.simson.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.61 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1430 Lines: 35 On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 11:40 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 05:32:00PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 17:27 +0200, Corrado Zoccolo wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 12:55:25PM +0200, Corrado Zoccolo wrote: > > > > > > > > Actually I am not touching this code. Looking at the V10, I have not > > > > changed anything here in idling code. > > > > > > I based my analisys on the original patch: > > > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0907.1/01793.html > > > > > > Mike, can you confirm which version of the fairness patch did you use > > > in your tests? > > > > That would be this one-liner. > > > > Ok. Thanks. Sorry, I got confused and thought that you are using "io > controller patches" with fairness=1. > > In that case, Corrado's suggestion of refining it further and disabling idling > for seeky process only on non-rotational media (SSD and hardware RAID), makes > sense to me. One thing that might help with that is to have new tasks start out life meeting the seeky criteria. If there's anything going on, they will be. -Mike -- 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/