lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 05/18] writeback: per task dirty rate limit
From
Date
On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 01:27 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 06-09-11 17:47:10, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Sun, 2011-09-04 at 09:53 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > /*
> > > + * After a task dirtied this many pages, balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited_nr()
> > > + * will look to see if it needs to start dirty throttling.
> > > + *
> > > + * If dirty_poll_interval is too low, big NUMA machines will call the expensive
> > > + * global_page_state() too often. So scale it near-sqrt to the safety margin
> > > + * (the number of pages we may dirty without exceeding the dirty limits).
> > > + */
> > > +static unsigned long dirty_poll_interval(unsigned long dirty,
> > > + unsigned long thresh)
> > > +{
> > > + if (thresh > dirty)
> > > + return 1UL << (ilog2(thresh - dirty) >> 1);
> > > +
> > > + return 1;
> > > +}
> >
> > Where does that sqrt come from?
> He does 2^{log_2(x)/2} which, if done in real numbers arithmetics, would
> result in x^{1/2}. Given the integer arithmetics, it might be twice as
> small but still it's some approximation...

Right, and I guess with a cpu that can do the fls its slightly faster
than our int_sqrt().


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-09-07 18:35    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans