[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100719142145.GD12510@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 10:21:45 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] writeback: sync old inodes first in background
writeback
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 02:11:29PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
>
> A background flush work may run for ever. So it's reasonable for it to
> mimic the kupdate behavior of syncing old/expired inodes first.
>
> This behavior also makes sense from the perspective of page reclaim.
> File pages are added to the inactive list and promoted if referenced
> after one recycling. If not referenced, it's very easy for pages to be
> cleaned from reclaim context which is inefficient in terms of IO. If
> background flush is cleaning pages, it's best it cleans old pages to
> help minimise IO from reclaim.
Yes, we absolutely do this. Wu, do you have an improved version of the
pending or should we put it in this version for now?
--
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