From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: Andreas Mohr <andi@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
ck@vds.kolivas.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ck] Re: [PATCH] mm: yield during swap prefetching
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 19:52:42 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603081952.42853.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060308084824.GA4193@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de>
On Wednesday 08 March 2006 19:48, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 03:26:36PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> wrote:
> > > Swap prefetching doesn't use very much cpu but spends a lot of time
> > > waiting on disk in uninterruptible sleep. This means it won't get
> > > preempted often even at a low nice level since it is seen as sleeping
> > > most of the time. We want to minimise its cpu impact so yield where
> > > possible.
> >
> > yield() really sucks if there are a lot of runnable tasks. And the
> > amount of CPU which that thread uses isn't likely to matter anyway.
> >
> > I think it'd be better to just not do this. Perhaps alter the thread's
> > static priority instead? Does the scheduler have a knob which can be
> > used to disable a tasks's dynamic priority boost heuristic?
>
> This problem occurs due to giving a priority boost to processes that are
> sleeping a lot (e.g. in this case, I/O, from disk), right?
> Forgive me my possibly less insightful comments, but maybe instead of
> adding crude specific hacks (namely, yield()) to each specific problematic
> process as it comes along (it just happens to be the swap prefetch thread
> this time) there is a *general way* to give processes with lots of disk I/O
> sleeping much smaller amounts of boost in order to get them preempted more
> often in favour of an actually much more critical process (game)?
>
> >From the discussion here it seems this problem is caused by a *general*
>
> miscalculation of processes sleeping on disk I/O a lot.
>
> Thus IMHO this problem should be solved in a general way if at all
> possible.
No. We already do special things for tasks waiting on uninterruptible sleep.
This is more about what is exaggerated on a dual array expiring scheduler
design that mainline has.
Cheers,
Con
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-08 8:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-07 23:13 Con Kolivas
2006-03-07 23:26 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-07 23:32 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 0:05 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-08 0:51 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 1:11 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-08 1:12 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 1:19 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 1:23 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-08 1:28 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 2:08 ` Lee Revell
2006-03-08 2:12 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 2:18 ` Lee Revell
2006-03-08 2:22 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 2:27 ` Lee Revell
2006-03-08 2:30 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 2:52 ` [ck] " André Goddard Rosa
2006-03-08 3:03 ` Lee Revell
2006-03-08 3:05 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 21:07 ` Zan Lynx
2006-03-08 23:00 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 23:48 ` Zan Lynx
2006-03-09 0:07 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-09 3:13 ` Zan Lynx
2006-03-09 4:08 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-09 4:54 ` Lee Revell
2006-03-08 7:51 ` Jan Knutar
2006-03-08 8:39 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-09 8:57 ` Helge Hafting
2006-03-09 9:08 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-09 22:44 ` Peter Williams
2006-03-10 9:01 ` [ck] " Andreas Mohr
2006-03-10 9:11 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-10 0:58 ` Peter Williams
2006-03-08 22:24 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-09 2:22 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-09 2:30 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-09 2:57 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-09 9:11 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-08 13:36 ` [ck] " Con Kolivas
2006-03-17 9:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-03-08 8:48 ` Andreas Mohr
2006-03-08 8:52 ` Con Kolivas [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200603081952.42853.kernel@kolivas.org \
--to=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=andi@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de \
--cc=ck@vds.kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox