[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100913142412.dc0f6950.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 14:24:12 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, fengguang.wu@...el.com, jack@...e.cz,
riel@...hat.com, david@...morbit.com,
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, npiggin@...nel.dk, hch@....de,
axboe@...nel.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] writeback: Reporting dirty thresholds in
/proc/vmstat
On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 22:58:13 -0700
Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com> wrote:
> 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
>
Yes, I think /proc/vmstat is a decent place to put these. The needed
infrastructural support is minimal and although these numbers are
closely tied to the implementation-of-the-day, people should expect
individual fields in /proc/vmstat to appear and disappear at random as
kernel versions change.
--
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