lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: udevd is killing file write performance.
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 06:56:39AM -0600, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 12:05:47PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Let me reiterate, I know _VERY_ little about filesystems. Can the
> > > dentry->d_lock be changed to a read/write lock?
> >
> > Well, it could, but I suspect that won't help - the hold times in there
> > will be very short so the problem is more likely acquisition frequency.
> >
> > However it's a bit strange that this function is the bottleneck. If their
> > workload is doing large numbers of reads or writes from large numbers of
> > processes against the same file then they should be hitting heavy
> > contention on other locks, such as i_sem and/or tree_lock and/or lru_lock
> > and others.
> >
> > Can you tell us more about the kernel-visible behaviour of this app?
>
> I looked at a little more of the output. All I have to go on is a few
> back traces generated by kdb of the entire system a few seconds apart.
>
> In all of the traces, the first chunk of cpus are the only ones doing
> writes. I have not counted exactly, but I think it is around 32. There
> may be more or less, but that is the feeling (sometimes they are doing
> reads as well).

Robin, is the app doing direct or buffered I/O?

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
R&D Software Enginner
SGI Australian Software Group
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-23 14:45    [W:0.095 / U:0.940 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site