[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] cfq-prio #2
    On Tue, Nov 11 2003, Nick Piggin wrote:
    > >>>>Its quite important. If the queue is full, and AS is waiting for a
    > >>>>process
    > >>>>to submit a request, its got a long wait.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Maybe a lower limit for per process nr_requests. Ie. you may queue if
    > >>>>this
    > >>>>queue has less than 128 requests _or_ you have less than 8 requests
    > >>>>outstanding. This would solve my problem. It would also give you a much
    > >>>>more
    > >>>>appropriate scaling for server workloads, I think. Still, thats quite a
    > >>>>change in behaviour (simple to code though).
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>That basically belongs inside your may_queue for the io scheduler, imo.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>You can force it to disallow the request, but you can't force it to allow
    > >>one (depending on a successful memory allocation, of course).
    > >>
    > >
    > >Well that's back two mails then, make may_queue return whether you must
    > >queue, may queue, or can't queue.
    > >
    > Yep, sounds good. I'll make a patch for it for 2.6.x > 0 sometime unless
    > you beat me to it.

    I'll include it in the next cfq patch, then it can be submitted when the
    freeze unthaws a bit.

    Jens Axboe

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.022 / U:10.500 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site