Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932079Ab1BXQTu (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:19:50 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:64464 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754775Ab1BXQTt (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:19:49 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:18:44 -0500 From: Vivek Goyal To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Andrea Righi , Balbir Singh , Daisuke Nishimura , Greg Thelen , Wu Fengguang , Gui Jianfeng , Ryo Tsuruta , Hirokazu Takahashi , Jens Axboe , Andrew Morton , Jonathan Corbet , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] blk-throttle: writeback and swap IO control Message-ID: <20110224161844.GD18494@redhat.com> References: <1298394776-9957-1-git-send-email-arighi@develer.com> <20110222193403.GG28269@redhat.com> <20110222224141.GA23723@linux.develer.com> <20110223000358.GM28269@redhat.com> <20110223083206.GA2174@linux.develer.com> <20110223152354.GA2526@redhat.com> <20110223231410.GB1744@linux.develer.com> <20110224001033.GF2526@redhat.com> <20110224094039.89c07bea.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110224094039.89c07bea.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1560 Lines: 39 On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 09:40:39AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: [..] > > > If we don't consider the swap IO, any other IO > > > operation from our point of view will happen directly from process > > > context (writes in memory + sync reads from the block device). > > > > Why do we need to account for swap IO? Application never asked for swap > > IO. It is kernel's decision to move soem pages to swap to free up some > > memory. What's the point in charging those pages to application group > > and throttle accordingly? > > > > I think swap I/O should be controlled by memcg's dirty_ratio. > But, IIRC, NEC guy had a requirement for this... > > I think some enterprise cusotmer may want to throttle the whole speed of > swapout I/O (not swapin)...so, they may be glad if they can limit throttle > the I/O against a disk partition or all I/O tagged as 'swapio' rather than > some cgroup name. If swap is on a separate disk, then one can control put write throttling rules on systemwide swapout. Though I still don't understand how that can help. > > But I'm afraid slow swapout may consume much dirty_ratio and make things > worse ;) Exactly. So I think focus should be controlling things earlier and stop applications early before they can either write too much data in page cache etc. 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/