lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH]cfq-iosched: don't stop async queue with async requests pending
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 01:27:21PM +0800, Gui Jianfeng wrote:
> Shaohua Li wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 07:13:41PM +0800, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 04:23:22PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 04:18:47PM +0800, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>>> My SSD speed of direct write is about 80m/s, while I test page writeback,
> >>>>> the speed can only go to 68m/s. Below patch fixes this.
> >>>>> It appears we missused cfq_should_idle in cfq_may_dispatch. cfq_should_idle
> >>>>> means a queue should idle because it's seekless sync queue or it's the last queue,
> >>>>> which is to maintain service tree time slice. So it doesn't mean the
> >>>>> last queue is always a sync queue. If the last queue is asyn queue,
> >>>>> we definitely shouldn't stop dispatch requests because of pending async
> >>>>> requests.
> >>>> An other option is that cfq_should_idle returns false for async
> >>>> queues, since cfq will never idle on them.
> >>> I'm considering this option too, but it appears we need make async queue
> >>> idle to maintain domain time slice.
> >> IMHO, we don't have to wait on async write service tree. Generally aysnc
> >> write queus contain many requests and they are not like reads where next
> >> request is expected. So idling on aysnc write service tree is waste of
> >> time and will lead to reduced throughput.
> > I fully agree async queue doesn't need wait. I thought the purpose we add the last
> > queue check in cfq_should_idle is we want a service tree or a group has dedicated
> > slice, because before the service tree/group slice is expired, new queue can jump
> > in and if we don't idle, the new queue can only run at next slice. Not sure if I
> > understand the code correctly.
>
> Hi Shaohua,
>
> If a cfq queue is the last one in the io group, if we expire this cfqq immediately,
> io group will be removed from service tree. When io group gets backlogged again, it
> will be put at the end of service tree, so it loses its previous share. so we add
> the last check here from the fairness point of view.
ya, this is what I'm understanding. So we can't return false for async queue
in cfq_should_idle if the queue is the last one of service tree.

Thanks,
Shaohua


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-01-14 07:21    [W:0.085 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site