[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100822192710.6018.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2010 19:27:54 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, fengguang.wu@...el.com, jack@...e.cz,
riel@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...morbit.com,
npiggin@...nel.dk, hch@....de, axboe@...nel.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] writeback: Reporting dirty thresholds in /proc/vmstat
> > The kernel already exposes the user desired thresholds in /proc/sys/vm
> > with dirty_background_ratio and background_ratio. But the kernel may
> > alter the number requested without giving the user any indication that
> > is the case.
> >
> > Knowing the actual ratios the kernel is honoring can help app developers
> > understand how their buffered IO will be sent to the disk.
> >
> > $ grep threshold /proc/vmstat
> > nr_dirty_threshold 409111
> > nr_dirty_background_threshold 818223
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>
>
> Looks good to me.
> Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
sorry, this is mistake. Wu pointed out this patch is unnecessary.
Wu wrote:
> I realized that the dirty thresholds has already been exported here:
>
> $ grep Thresh /debug/bdi/8:0/stats
> BdiDirtyThresh: 381000 kB
> DirtyThresh: 1719076 kB
> BackgroundThresh: 859536 kB
>
> So why not use that interface directly?
--
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