[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130412045042.GA30622@dastard>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:50:42 +1000
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: Excessive stall times on ext4 in 3.9-rc2
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:57:08PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:33:35PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > I think it might be more enlightening if Mel traced which process in
> > which funclion is holding the buffer lock. I suspect we'll find out that
> > the flusher thread has submitted the buffer for IO as an async write and
> > thus it takes a long time to complete in presence of reads which have
> > higher priority.
>
> That's an interesting theory. If the workload is one which is very
> heavy on reads and writes, that could explain the high latency. That
> would explain why those of us who are using primarily SSD's are seeing
> the problems, because would be reads are nice and fast.
>
> If that is the case, one possible solution that comes to mind would be
> to mark buffer_heads that contain metadata with a flag, so that the
> flusher thread can write them back at the same priority as reads.
Ext4 is already using REQ_META for this purpose.
I'm surprised that no-one has suggested "change the IO elevator"
yet.....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists