lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Nov]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V4 15/15] blk-throttle: add latency target support
Hello,

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 02:22:22PM -0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> One hard problem adding .high limit is to detect idle cgroup. If one
> cgroup doesn't dispatch enough IO against its high limit, we must have a
> mechanism to determine if other cgroups dispatch more IO. We added the
> think time detection mechanism before, but it doesn't work for all
> workloads. Here we add a latency based approach.

As I wrote before, I think that the two mechanisms should operate on
two mostly separate aspects of io control - latency control for
arbitrating active cgroups and idle detection to count out cgroups
which are sitting doing nothing - instead of the two meachanisms
possibly competing.

> static bool throtl_tg_is_idle(struct throtl_grp *tg)
> {
> - /* cgroup is idle if average think time is more than threshold */
> - return ktime_get_ns() - tg->last_finish_time >
> + /*
> + * cgroup is idle if:
> + * 1. average think time is higher than threshold
> + * 2. average request size is small and average latency is higher
^
lower, right?
> + * than target
> + */

So, this looks like too much magic to me. How would one configure for
a workload which may issue small IOs, say, every few seconds but
requries low latency?

Thanks.

--
tejun

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-11-29 18:32    [W:0.401 / U:0.752 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site