[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1281089846.1947.411.camel@laptop>
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2010 12:17:26 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/13] writeback: add comment to the dirty limits
functions
On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 00:10 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> +/**
> + * bdi_dirty_limit - @bdi's share of dirty throttling threshold
> + *
> + * Allocate high/low dirty limits to fast/slow devices, in order to prevent
> + * - starving fast devices
> + * - piling up dirty pages (that will take long time to sync) on slow devices
> + *
> + * The bdi's share of dirty limit will be adapting to its throughput and
> + * bounded by the bdi->min_ratio and/or bdi->max_ratio parameters, if set.
> + */
Another thing solved by the introduction of per-bdi dirty limits (and
now per-bdi flushing) is the whole stacked-bdi writeout deadlock.
Although I'm not sure we want/need to mention that here.
--
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