linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] VM throttling: avoid blocking occasional writers

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]

Message-ID: <4607FECD.1090101@tmr.com>
Date:	Mon, 26 Mar 2007 13:11:41 -0400
From:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
To:	Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama.qu@...achi.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yumiko.sugita.yf@...achi.com,
	masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com, hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com,
	yuji.kakutani.uw@...achi.com, soshima@...hat.com, haoki@...hat.com,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, nikita@...sterfs.com,
	leroy.vanlogchem@...elft.nl
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] VM throttling: avoid blocking occasional writers

Tomoki Sekiyama wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks for your reply.
>
>   
>>> 3) Use "dirty_ratio" as the blocking ratio. And add
>>>   "start_writeback_ratio", and start writeback at
>>>   start_writeback_ratio(default:90) * dirty_ratio / 100 [%].
>>>   In this way, specifying blocking ratio can be done in the same way
>>>   as current kernel, but high/low watermark algorithm is enabled.
>>>       
>> I like 3 better, it should make tuning behavior more precise.
>>     
>
> Then, what do you think of the following idea?
>
> (4) add `dirty_start_writeback_ratio' as percentage of memory,
>     at which a generator of dirty pages itself starts writeback
>     (that is, non-blocking ratio).
>
> In this way, `dirty_ratio' is used as the blocking ratio, so we don't
> need to modify the sysctl.conf etc. I think it's easier to understand
> for administrators of systems, because the interface is similar as
> `dirty_background_ratio' and`dirty_ratio.'
>
> If this is OK, I'll repost the patch.
>   
It sounds good to me, just be sure behavior is sane for for both 
blocking less than start_writeback and vice versa.
>   
>> You can make an argument for absolute values for writeback,
>> if my disk will only write 70MB/s I may only want 203 sec of
>> pending writes, regardless of available memory.
>>     
>
> To realize tuning with absolute values, I consider that we need to
> modify handling of `dirty_background_ratio,' `dirty_ratio' and so on as
> well as `dirty_start_writeback_ratio.' I think this should be done in
> another patch if this feature is required.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Tomoki Sekiyama
> Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory
>
>
>   


-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@....com>
  CTO TMR Associates, Inc
  Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

-
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/