Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755517AbZKWPVg (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:21:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755067AbZKWPVf (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:21:35 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60158 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754121AbZKWPVc (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:21:32 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:19:46 -0500 From: Vivek Goyal To: Corrado Zoccolo Cc: "Alan D. Brunelle" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Block IO Controller V2 - some results Message-ID: <20091123151946.GA3112@redhat.com> References: <4e5e476b0911180820y5d99a81et6be7f6f94442d0d5@mail.gmail.com> <20091118225626.GA2974@redhat.com> <4e5e476b0911181535y4d73d381s14b54c6d787d2b46@mail.gmail.com> <20091120141840.GA5872@redhat.com> <4e5e476b0911200628g42a0ab6ftd65b68bff5d1aea3@mail.gmail.com> <20091120150421.GC5872@redhat.com> <4e5e476b0911201032j5319b012v5fd0a64ebfe11089@mail.gmail.com> <20091120184257.GG5872@redhat.com> <4e5e476b0911201150p7cbdfc20k4b8d02f07e16abc8@mail.gmail.com> <4e5e476b0911210957g5b099329u33fa6ec4d740f7d1@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4e5e476b0911210957g5b099329u33fa6ec4d740f7d1@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2099 Lines: 48 On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 06:57:47PM +0100, Corrado Zoccolo wrote: > Hi Vivek, > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Corrado Zoccolo wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > >> > >> Should we also take into account the "cfqq->dispatched" request in > >> determining whether we should enable idling on deep queue random seeky > >> readers? > > > > Probably, but I think the most important thing is to do some averaging > > or hysteresis, so the completion of a single request doesn't cause the > > switch of a workload. > > can you test the new version of the idling patch? > I register the fact that the queue had a large depth in a flag, that > is reset only when the idle times out (so at the end of the burst). > Idling is enabled if that flag is set (and think time is acceptable). > This should fix the switching behaviour you observed. > > I decided to not count cfqq->dispatched to determine the depth. > In this way, when all queues in the system are random the idling is > enabled only if the requests queue builds up faster than it can be > consumed. Hi Corrado, This patch seems to be working much better in marking the random writer queue as sync and not interefere with sync-noidle workload. So frequent migration of random writer queue across group has stopped. But there seems to be a different issue now after sometime, random writer queue stops generating enough traffic and gets deleted after one request and root group now runs random reader for sometime. So it basically changes the ratio in which random writers and random readers get disk share. I guess part of the dependency comes from kjournald which is in root group. But there is something else too because I don't see this happening when there are no cgroups. I will do more debugging on this. 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/