[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1JExrc-00014E-FC@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:18:48 +0800
From: Fengguang Wu <wfg@...l.ustc.edu.cn>
To: Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] writeback bug fixes and simplifications take 2
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:33:01AM -0800, Michael Rubin wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2008 4:36 AM, Fengguang Wu <wfg@...l.ustc.edu.cn> wrote:
> > Andrew,
> >
> > This patchset mainly polishes the writeback queuing policies.
>
> Anyone know which tree is this patched based out of?
They are against the latest -mm tree, or 2.6.24-rc6-mm1.
> > The main goals are:
> >
> > (1) small files should not be starved by big dirty files
> > (2) sync as fast as possible for not-blocked inodes/pages
> > - don't leave them out; no congestion_wait() in between them
> > (3) avoid busy iowait for blocked inodes
> > - retry them in the next go of s_io(maybe at the next wakeup of pdflush)
> >
>
> Fengguang do you have any specific tests for any of these cases? As I
> have posted earlier I am putting together a writeback test suite for
> test.kernel.org and if you have one (even if it's an ugly shell
> script) that would save me some time.
No, I just run tests with cp/dd etc. I analyze the code and debug
traces a lot, and know that it works in the situations I can imagine.
But dedicated test suites are good in the long term.
> Also if you want any of mine let me know. :-)
OK, thank you.
Fengguang
--
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