linux-kernel - Re: Block IO Controller V4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:34:36 +0100
From:	Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@...il.com>
To:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
	nauman@...gle.com, dpshah@...gle.com, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
	ryov@...inux.co.jp, fernando@....ntt.co.jp, s-uchida@...jp.nec.com,
	taka@...inux.co.jp, guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com, jmoyer@...hat.com,
	righi.andrea@...il.com, m-ikeda@...jp.nec.com, Alan.Brunelle@...com
Subject: Re: Block IO Controller V4

Hi Vivek,
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 3:59 AM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com> wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> [snip]
> TODO
> ====
> - Direct random writers seem to be very fickle in terms of workload
>  classification. They seem to be switching between sync-idle and sync-noidle
>  workload type in a little unpredictable manner. Debug and fix it.
>

Are you still experiencing erratic behaviour after my patches were
integrated in for-2.6.33?

> - Support async IO control (buffered writes).
I was thinking about this.
Currently, writeback can either be issued by a kernel daemon (when
actual dirty ratio is > background dirty ratio, but < dirty_ratio) or
from various processes, if the actual dirty ratio is > dirty ratio.
Could the writeback issued in the context of a process be marked as sync?
In this way:
* normal writeback when system is not under pressure will run in the
root group, without interferring with sync workload
* the writeback issued when we have high dirty ratio will have more
priority, so the system will return in a normal condition quicker.
* your code will work out of the box, in fact processes with lower
weight will complete less I/O, therefore they will be slowed down more
than higher weight ones.

>
>  Buffered writes is a beast and requires changes at many a places to solve the
>  problem and patchset becomes huge. Hence first we plan to support only sync
>  IO in control then work on async IO too.
>
>  Some of the work items identified are.
>
>        - Per memory cgroup dirty ratio
>        - Possibly modification of writeback to force writeback from a
>          particular cgroup.
>        - Implement IO tracking support so that a bio can be mapped to a cgroup.
>        - Per group request descriptor infrastructure in block layer.
>        - At CFQ level, implement per cfq_group async queues.
>
>  In this patchset, all the async IO goes in system wide queues and there are
>  no per group async queues. That means we will see service differentiation
>  only for sync IO only. Async IO willl be handled later.
>
> - Support for higher level policies like max BW controller.
> - Support groups of RT class also.

Thanks,
Corrado
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/