From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Hisashi Hifumi <hifumi.hisashi@oss.ntt.co.jp>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Ronald <intercommit@gmail.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@gmail.com>,
Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@vlnb.net>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Fix Readahead stalling by plugged device queues
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:25:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100319002558.GD5454@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100311132913.GB6692@localhost>
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:29:13PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 05:58:08PM +0800, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
> > Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:31:46PM +0800, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > >> [...]
> > >>> Christian, did you notice this commit for 2.6.33?
> > >>>
> > >>> commit 65a80b4c61f5b5f6eb0f5669c8fb120893bfb388
> > >> [...]
> > >>
> > >> I didn't see that particular one, due to the fact that whatever the
> > >> result is it needs to work .32
> > >>
> > >> Anyway I'll test it tomorrow and if that already accepted one fixes my
> > >> issue as well I'll recommend distros older than 2.6.33 picking that one
> > >> up in their on top patches.
> > >
> > > OK, thanks!
> >
> > That patch fixes my issue completely and is as we discussed less
> > aggressive which is fine - thanks for pointing it out - Now I have
> > something already upstream accepted to fix the issue, thats much better!
>
> That's great news, it works beyond my expectation.. :)
>
> > >>> It should at least improve performance between .32 and .33, because
> > >>> once two readahead requests are merged into one single IO request,
> > >>> the PageUptodate() will be true at next readahead, and hence
> > >>> blk_run_backing_dev() get called to break out of the suboptimal
> > >>> situation.
> > >> As you saw from my blktrace thats already the case without that patch.
> > >> Once the second readahead comes in and merged it gets unplugged in
> > >> 2.6.32 too - but still that is bad behavior as it denies my things like
> > >> 68% throughput improvement :-).
> > >
> > > I mean, when readahead windows A and B are submitted in one IO --
> > > let's call it AB -- commit 65a80b4c61 will explicitly unplug on doing
> > > readahead C. While in your trace, the unplug appears on AB.
> > >
> > > The 68% improvement is very impressive. Wondering if commit 65a80b4c61
> > > (the _conditional_ unplug) can achieve the same level of improvement :)
> >
> > Yep it can !
> > We can post update the patch description to bigger numbers :-)
>
> Andrew/Greg, shall we push the patch to .32 stable?
I've now queued it up.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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:[~2010-03-19 0:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-10 12:31 Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-10 13:09 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-03-10 14:31 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-11 1:45 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-03-11 9:58 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-11 13:29 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-03-19 0:25 ` Greg KH [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=20100319002558.GD5454@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bart.vanassche@gmail.com \
--cc=ehrhardt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=hifumi.hisashi@oss.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=intercommit@gmail.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=vst@vlnb.net \
/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