From: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@android.com>
To: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, Martin Liu <liumartin@google.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, axboe@kernel.dk, dchinner@redhat.com,
jenhaochen@google.com, salyzyn@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: readahead: add readahead_shift into backing device
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 09:59:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9b194e61-f2d0-82cb-30ac-95afb493b894@android.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190325121628.zxlogz52go6k36on@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com>
On 03/25/2019 05:16 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Martin,
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 11:46:11PM +0800, Martin Liu wrote:
>> As the discussion https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/334982/
>> We know an open file's ra_pages might run out of sync from
>> bdi.ra_pages since sequential, random or error read. Current design
>> is we have to ask users to reopen the file or use fdavise system
>> call to get it sync. However, we might have some cases to change
>> system wide file ra_pages to enhance system performance such as
>> enhance the boot time by increasing the ra_pages or decrease it to
>
> Do you have examples that some distro making use of larger ra_pages
> for boot time optimization?
Android (if you are willing to squint and look at android-common AOSP
kernels as a Distro).
>
> Suppose N read streams with equal read speed. The thrash-free memory
> requirement would be (N * 2 * ra_pages).
>
> If N=1000 and ra_pages=1MB, it'd require 2GB memory. Which looks
> affordable in mainstream servers.
That is 50% of the memory on a high end Android device ...
>
> Sorry but it sounds like introducing an unnecessarily twisted new
> interface. I'm afraid it fixes the pain for 0.001% users while
> bringing more puzzle to the majority others.
>2B Android devices on the planet is 0.001%?
I am not defending the proposed interface though, if there is something
better that can be used, then looking into:
>
> Then let fadvise() and shrink_readahead_size_eio() adjust that
> per-file ra_pages_shift.
Sounds like this would require a lot from init to globally audit and
reduce the read-ahead for all open files?
Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-25 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-22 15:46 Martin Liu
2019-03-25 12:16 ` Fengguang Wu
2019-03-25 16:59 ` Mark Salyzyn [this message]
2019-03-26 1:30 ` Fengguang Wu
2019-03-26 8:12 ` Martin Liu
2019-03-27 12:43 ` Fengguang Wu
2019-03-29 0:33 ` [mm] 71ee870ccb: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -2.9% regression kernel test robot
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=9b194e61-f2d0-82cb-30ac-95afb493b894@android.com \
--to=salyzyn@android.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=jenhaochen@google.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liumartin@google.com \
--cc=salyzyn@google.com \
/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