lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Dec]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: 2.2.19pre3 and poor reponse to RT-scheduled processes?
Date
In article <20001230191639.E9332@athlon.random>,
Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 04:54:23PM -0500, Rafal Boni wrote:
>> Now my box behaves much more reasonably... I'll just have to beat harder
>> on it and see what happens.
>
>Another thing: while writing to disk if you want low latency readers you can
>do:
>
> elvtune -r 1 /dev/hd[abcd]
>
>The 1/2 seconds stalls you see could be just because of applications that waits
>I/O synchronously while the elevator is reodering I/O requests (and even if the
>elevator wouldn't reorder anything the new requests would go to the end of the
>I/O queue so they would have some higher latency anyways).

That sounds like too long a stall to be due to elevator ordering except
with some _really_ unlucky access patterns (or with slow disks).

There are other, equally likely, candidates for these kinds of stalls:

- filesystem locks. Especially the ext2 superblock lock. You can easily
hit this one, as some ext2 functions actually do a lot of IO while
holding the lock.

- synchronously waiting for bdflush with balance_dirty_buffers().
Especially mixed with the above.

A mixture of the two above will bascally stall the whole machine: almost
any non-cached file access ends up waiting for the superblock lock and
bdflush, and it can easily get quite unfair.

Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:52    [W:0.048 / U:5.104 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site