[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121018022530.GB24939@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:25:30 +0800
From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@...il.com>
To: Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxram@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, dave@...os.cz, tytso@....edu,
cmm@...ibm.com, Zhi Yong Wu <wuzhy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 09/13] vfs: add one wq to update map info periodically
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 02:34:15PM +0800, Zhi Yong Wu wrote:
> >> diff --git a/fs/hot_tracking.h b/fs/hot_tracking.h
> >> index d19e64a..7a79a6d 100644
> >> --- a/fs/hot_tracking.h
> >> +++ b/fs/hot_tracking.h
> >> @@ -36,6 +36,9 @@
> >> */
> >> #define TIME_TO_KICK 400
> >>
> >> +/* set how often to update temperatures (seconds) */
> >> +#define HEAT_UPDATE_DELAY 400
> >
> > FWIW, 400 seconds is an unusual time period. It's expected that
> > periodic work might take place at intervals of 5 minutes, 10
> > minutes, etc, not 6m40s. It's much easier to predict and understand
> > behaviour if it's at a interval of whole units like minutes,
> > especially when looking at timestamped event traces. Hence 300s (5
> > minutes) makes a lot more sense as a period for updates...
> got it. thanks.
Hi Zhi Yong,
IMHO we'd better to make this value parameterized, and then the user
can adjust this value dynamically.
Regards,
Zheng
--
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