| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20060828012830.GH807830@melbourne.sgi.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:28:30 +1000 From: David Chinner <dgc@....com> To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, David Chinner <dgc@....com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...l.org Subject: Re: RFC - how to balance Dirty+Writeback in the face of slow writeback. On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 08:37:24AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Fri, Aug 25 2006, Neil Brown wrote: > > > I'm beginning to think that the current scheme really works very well > > - except for a few 'bugs'(*). > > It works ok, but it makes it hard to experiment with larger queue depths > when the vm falls apart :-). It's not a big deal, though, even if the > design isn't very nice - nr_requests is not a well defined entity. It > can be anywhere from 512b to megabyte(s) in size. So throttling on X > number of requests tends to be pretty vague and depends hugely on the > workload (random vs sequential IO). So maybe we need a different control parameter - the amount of memory we allow to be backed up in a queue rather than the number of requests the queue can take... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists