[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 23:39:15 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
nauman@...gle.com, dpshah@...gle.com, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
mikew@...gle.com, fchecconi@...il.com, paolo.valente@...more.it,
ryov@...inux.co.jp, fernando@....ntt.co.jp, s-uchida@...jp.nec.com,
taka@...inux.co.jp, guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com, jmoyer@...hat.com,
dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
righi.andrea@...il.com, m-ikeda@...jp.nec.com, agk@...hat.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, peterz@...radead.org,
jmarchan@...hat.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 24/23] io-controller: Don't leave a queue active when
a disk is idle
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> o It is possible that when there is only a single queue in the system, it
> remains unexpired for a long time (because there is no IO activity on the
> disk). So when next request comes in after a long time, it might make
> scheduler think that all this while queue used the disk and it will assign
> a high vdisktime to the queue. Hence make sure queue is expired once all
> the requests have completed from the queue.
>
> o Also avoid unnecessarily expiring a queue when it has got one request
> dispatched to the queue and waiting for it to finish and it does not have
> more requests queued to dispatch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
--
All rights reversed.
--
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