[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180712164422.a53cc0f9c26b078dbc7e5731@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 16:44:22 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@...eaurora.org>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/10] psi: pressure stall information for CPU, memory,
and IO v2
On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 13:29:32 -0400 Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> The io file is similar to memory. Because the block layer doesn't have
> a concept of hardware contention right now (how much longer is my IO
> request taking due to other tasks?), it reports CPU potential lost on
> all IO delays, not just the potential lost due to competition.
Probably dumb question: disks aren't the only form of IO. Does it make
sense to accumulate PSI for other forms of IO? Networking comes to
mind...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists