[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1254585420.7539.2.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 17:57:00 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ulrich Lukas <stellplatz-nr.13a@...enparkplatz.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
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, 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, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Do not overload dispatch queue (Was: Re: IO scheduler based IO
controller V10)
On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 17:14 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 03 2009, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 16:28 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 03 2009, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 09:56 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I have kept the overload delay period as "cfq_slice_sync" same as Mike had
> > > > > done. We shall have to experiment what is a good waiting perioed. Is 100ms
> > > > > too long if we are waiting for a request from same process which recently
> > > > > finished IO and we did not enable idle on it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess we can tweak the delay period as we move along.
> > > >
> > > > I kept the delay period very short to minimize possible damage. Without
> > > > the idle thing, it wasn't enough, but with, worked a treat, as does your
> > > > patch.
> > >
> > > Can you test the current line up of patches in for-linus? It has the
> > > ramp up I talked about included as well.
> >
> > Well, it hasn't hit git.kernel.org yet, it's at...
> >
> > * block-for-linus 1d22351 cfq-iosched: add a knob for desktop interactiveness
>
> It's the top three patches here, kernel.org sync sometimes takes a
> while...
>
> http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-2.6-block.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/for-linus
Ok, already had the first two in, added the last.
Entered uncharted territory for konsole -e exit, but lost a bit of
throughput for home-brew concurrent git test.
perf stat 1.70 1.94 1.32 1.89 1.87 1.7 fairness=1 overload_delay=1
1.55 1.79 1.38 1.53 1.57 1.5 desktop=1 +last_end_sync
1.09 0.87 1.11 0.96 1.11 1.0 block-for-linus
perf stat testo.sh Avg
108.12 106.33 106.34 97.00 106.52 104.8 1.000 fairness=0 overload_delay=0
93.98 102.44 94.47 97.70 98.90 97.4 .929 fairness=0 overload_delay=1
90.87 95.40 95.79 93.09 94.25 93.8 .895 fairness=1 overload_delay=0
89.93 90.57 89.13 93.43 93.72 91.3 .871 fairness=1 overload_delay=1
89.81 88.82 91.56 96.57 89.38 91.2 .870 desktop=1 +last_end_sync
92.61 94.60 92.35 93.17 94.05 93.3 .890 block-for-linus
-Mike
--
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