[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F73ADFC.7040404@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 09:34:04 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
CC: Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@...e.com>,
Andrea Righi <andrea@...terlinux.com>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] buffered write IO controller in balance_dirty_pages()
(2012/03/28 21:13), Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Here is one possible solution to "buffered write IO controller", based on Linux
> v3.3
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/linux.git buffered-write-io-controller
>
> Features:
> - support blkio.weight
> - support blkio.throttle.buffered_write_bps
>
> Possibilities:
> - it's trivial to support per-bdi .weight or .buffered_write_bps
>
> Pros:
> 1) simple
> 2) virtually no space/time overheads
> 3) independent of the block layer and IO schedulers, hence
> 3.1) supports all filesystems/storages, eg. NFS/pNFS, CIFS, sshfs, ...
> 3.2) supports all IO schedulers. One may use noop for SSDs, inside virtual machines, over iSCSI, etc.
>
> Cons:
> 1) don't try to smooth bursty IO submission in the flusher thread (*)
> 2) don't support IOPS based throttling
> 3) introduces semantic differences to blkio.weight, which will be
> - working by "bandwidth" for buffered writes
> - working by "device time" for direct IO
>
> (*) Maybe not a big concern, since the bursties are limited to 500ms: if one dd
> is throttled to 50% disk bandwidth, the flusher thread will be waking up on
> every 1 second, keep the disk busy for 500ms and then go idle for 500ms; if
> throttled to 10% disk bandwidth, the flusher thread will wake up on every 5s,
> keep busy for 500ms and stay idle for 4.5s.
>
> The test results included in the last patch look pretty good in despite of the
> simple implementation.
>
yes, seems very good.
> [PATCH 1/6] blk-cgroup: move blk-cgroup.h in include/linux/blk-cgroup.h
> [PATCH 2/6] blk-cgroup: account dirtied pages
> [PATCH 3/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - bandwidth weight
> [PATCH 4/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - bandwidth limit
> [PATCH 5/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - bandwidth limit interface
> [PATCH 6/6] blk-cgroup: buffered write IO controller - debug trace
>
> The changeset is dominated by the blk-cgroup.h move.
> The core changes (to page-writeback.c) are merely 77 lines.
>
> block/blk-cgroup.c | 27 +
> block/blk-cgroup.h | 364 --------------------------
> block/blk-throttle.c | 2
> block/cfq.h | 2
> include/linux/blk-cgroup.h | 396 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/trace/events/writeback.h | 34 ++
> mm/page-writeback.c | 77 +++++
> 7 files changed, 530 insertions(+), 372 deletions(-)
>
Thank you very much. I like this simple implementation.
I have 3 questions..
- Do you have any plan to enhance this to support hierarchical accounting ?
- Can we get wait-time-for-dirty-pages summary per blkio cgroup ?
- Can we get status (dirty/sec) per blkio cgroup ?
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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