[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100728110807.GB31360@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 07:08:07 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
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>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] writeback: Prioritise dirty inodes encountered by
reclaim for background flushing
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:27:23AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> It is preferable that as few dirty pages are dispatched for cleaning from
> the page reclaim path. When dirty pages are encountered by page reclaim,
> this patch marks the inodes that they should be dispatched immediately. When
> the background flusher runs, it moves such inodes immediately to the dispatch
> queue regardless of inode age.
Thus whole thing looks rather hacky to me. Does it really give a large
enough benefit to be worth all the hacks?
--
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