[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] O13int for interactivity
At 08:11 AM 8/5/2003 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
>On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 06:11, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > IMHO, absolute cut off is a very bad idea (btdt, and it _sucked rocks_).
> >
> > The last thing in the world you want to do is to remove differentiation
> > between tasks... try to classify them and make them all the same within
> > their class. For grins, take away all remaining differentiation, and run a
> > hefty parallel make.
>I didn't fully understand you but I get your drift. I have a better solution
>in the works anyway but I wanted this tested.

WRT disk wait: The pure disk load turns into a problem here only while
it's writing heavily, which means to me that either write throttling needs
a bit of work, or async write boost needs a bit of throttling (same
thing). To me, async operations using sync wakeups makes more sense than
trying to discriminate based upon task state. Writes are generally async,
and reads are generally sync. If a task is in D state waiting for a write
request to become available, it doesn't seem to me to be a good idea to
boost his priority, that allows the guy who is overloading your I/O system
and beating up your pagecache to preempt other pagecache users as soon as a
request becomes available. OTOH, a reader is almost always (except for
readahead?) sync, and _needs_ to be able to preempt to use the data it
waited on. Take for example swapin; remove the sleep credit for swapin,
and watch the thrash-fest begin... the light to moderate swap load that
your box formerly handled easily suddenly becomes a horrible mess.


[aside: "D state is involuntary sleep" is kinda wrong-minded I think. The
only voluntary sleep is a yield. All others could just as well be
considered involuntary (also wrong). A good example of what I mean is the
problem with X and xmms's gl thread inverting their priorities once X
expires in the presence of a non-interactive load. X isn't running at prio
25 because it is inherently a cpu hog, and the gl thread isn't at prio 16
because it's voluntarily sleeping. The situation is exactly the
opposite. The gl thread is a huge cpu hog that is "involuntarily"
sleeping, waiting on X, who is "involuntarily" permanently running because
it can't get enough cpu to catch up with it's workload so it can do what it
normally does, sleep. Also as an aside, if you want to have lots of fun
with D state, play with semaphores. Test results of using async/sync
wakeups there can be highly counter-intuitive.]

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 13:47    [W:0.073 / U:6.364 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site