[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1232222626.3666.14.camel@mercury.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:03:46 -0500
From: Ben Gamari <bgamari@...il.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...e.de>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ltt-dev@...ts.casi.polymtl.ca
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] block: Fix bio merge induced high I/O latency
On Sat, 2009-01-17 at 11:26 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> This patch implements a basic test to make sure we never merge more than 128
> requests into the same request if it is the "last_merge" request. I have not
> been able to trigger the problem again with the fix applied. It might not be in
> a perfect state : there may be better solutions to the problem, but I think it
> helps pointing out where the culprit lays.
Unfortunately, it seems like the patch hasn't really fixed much. After
porting it forward to Linus' master, I haven't exhibited any difference
in real world use cases (e.g. desktop use cases while building a
kernel).
Given Jen's remarks, I suppose this isn't too surprising. Does anyone
else with greater familiarity with the block I/O subsystem have any more
ideas about the source of the slowdown? It seems like the recent patches
incorporating blktrace support into ftrace could be helpful for further
data collection, correct?
- Ben
--
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