linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: ck@vds.kolivas.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [ck] Re: [PATCH] mm: yield during swap prefetching
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 00:36:48 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603090036.49915.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cone.1141774323.5234.18683.501@kolivas.org>

cc'ing Ingo...

On Wednesday 08 March 2006 10:32, Con Kolivas wrote:
> Andrew Morton writes:
> > 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.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
> >> ---
> >>  mm/swap_prefetch.c |    1 +
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >>
> >> Index: linux-2.6.15-ck5/mm/swap_prefetch.c
> >> ===================================================================
> >> --- linux-2.6.15-ck5.orig/mm/swap_prefetch.c	2006-03-02
> >> 14:00:46.000000000 +1100 +++
> >> linux-2.6.15-ck5/mm/swap_prefetch.c	2006-03-08 08:49:32.000000000 +1100
> >> @@ -421,6 +421,7 @@ static enum trickle_return trickle_swap(
> >>
> >>  		if (trickle_swap_cache_async(swp_entry, node) == TRICKLE_DELAY)
> >>  			break;
> >> +		yield();
> >>  	}
> >>
> >>  	if (sp_stat.prefetched_pages) {
> >
> > 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?
>
> We do have SCHED_BATCH but even that doesn't really have the desired
> effect. I know how much yield sucks and I actually want it to suck as much
> as yield does.

Thinking some more on this I wonder if SCHED_BATCH isn't a strong enough 
scheduling hint if it's not suitable for such an application. Ingo do you 
think we could make SCHED_BATCH tasks always wake up on the expired array?

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>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-03-08 13:36 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     ` Con Kolivas [this message]
2006-03-17  9:06       ` [ck] " Ingo Molnar
2006-03-08  8:48   ` Andreas Mohr
2006-03-08  8:52     ` Con Kolivas

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=200603090036.49915.kernel@kolivas.org \
    --to=kernel@kolivas.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=ck@vds.kolivas.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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