[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100817024140.GB13916@localhost>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 10:41:40 +0800
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
To: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
Peter Staubach <staubach@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Per file dirty limit throttling
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:19:50PM +0800, Nikanth Karthikesan wrote:
> When the total dirty pages exceed vm_dirty_ratio, the dirtier is made to do
> the writeback. But this dirtier may not be the one who took the system to this
> state. Instead, if we can track the dirty count per-file, we could throttle
> the dirtier of a file, when the file's dirty pages exceed a certain limit.
> Even though this dirtier may not be the one who dirtied the other pages of
> this file, it is fair to throttle this process, as it uses that file.
Nikanth, there's a more elegant solution in upstream kernel.
See the comment for task_dirty_limit() in commit 1babe1838.
NFS may want to limit per-file dirty pages, to prevent long stall time
inside the nfs_getattr()->filemap_write_and_wait() calls (and problems
like that). Peter Staubach has similar ideas on it.
Thanks,
Fengguang
--
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