[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1182623031.7066.1.camel@lappy>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 20:23:50 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, davej@...hat.com,
tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Change in default vm_dirty_ratio
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 16:08 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Matt Mackall wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps we want to throw some sliding window algorithms at it. We can
> > bound requests and total I/O and if requests get retired too slowly we
> > can shrink the windows. Alternately, we can grow the window if we're
> > retiring things within our desired timeframe.
>
> I suspect that would tend to be a good way to go. But it almost certainly
> has to be per-device, which implies that somebody would have to do some
> major coding/testing on this..
>
> The vm_dirty_ratio thing is a global value, and I think we need that
> regardless (for the independent issue of memory deadlocks etc), but if we
> *additionally* had a per-device throttle that was based on some kind of
> adaptive thing, we could probably raise the global (hard) vm_dirty_ratio a
> lot.
I just did quite a bit of that:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/14/437
-
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