[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090410163853.0e1b8f7c.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 16:38:53 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, npiggin@...e.de,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, yinghan@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] readahead: record mmap read-around states in
file_ra_state
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 14:10:06 +0800
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com> wrote:
> Mmap read-around now shares the same code style and data structure
> with readahead code.
>
> This also removes do_page_cache_readahead().
> Its last user, mmap read-around, has been changed to call ra_submit().
>
> The no-readahead-if-congested logic is dumped by the way.
> Users will be pretty sensitive about the slow loading of executables.
> So it's unfavorable to disabled mmap read-around on a congested queue.
Did you verify that the read-congested code ever triggers?
It used to be (and probably still is) the case that
bdi_read_congested() is very very rare, because the read queue is long
and the kernel rarely puts many read requests into it. You can of
course create this condition with a fake workload with may
threads/processes, but it _is_ fake.
Some real-world workloads (databases?) will of course trigger
bdi_read_congested(). But they're usually doing fixed-sized reads, and
if we're doing _any_ readahead/readaround in that case, readahead is
busted.
--
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