[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] Converting writeback linked lists to a tree based data structure
    Fengguang Wu <> writes:
    > Suppose we want to grant longer expiration window for temp files,
    > adding a new list named s_dirty_tmpfile would be a handy solution.

    How would the kernel know that a file is a tmp file?

    > So the question is: should we need more than 3 QoS classes?

    [just a random idea; i have not worked out all the implications]

    Would it be possible to derive a writeback apriority from the ionice
    level of the process originating the IO? e.g. we have long standing
    problems that background jobs even when niced and can cause
    significant slow downs to foreground processes by starving IO
    and pushing out pages. ionice was supposed to help with that
    but in practice it does not seem to have helped too much and I suspect
    it needs more prioritization higher up the VM food chain. Adding
    such priorities to writeback would seem like a step in the right
    direction, although it would of course not solve the problem


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-01-18 06:43    [W:0.018 / U:1.192 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site