lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Do not overload dispatch queue (Was: Re: IO scheduler based IO controller V10)
On Sat, Oct 03 2009, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 16:28 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 03 2009, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 09:56 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have kept the overload delay period as "cfq_slice_sync" same as Mike had
> > > > done. We shall have to experiment what is a good waiting perioed. Is 100ms
> > > > too long if we are waiting for a request from same process which recently
> > > > finished IO and we did not enable idle on it.
> > > >
> > > > I guess we can tweak the delay period as we move along.
> > >
> > > I kept the delay period very short to minimize possible damage. Without
> > > the idle thing, it wasn't enough, but with, worked a treat, as does your
> > > patch.
> >
> > Can you test the current line up of patches in for-linus? It has the
> > ramp up I talked about included as well.
>
> Well, it hasn't hit git.kernel.org yet, it's at...
>
> * block-for-linus 1d22351 cfq-iosched: add a knob for desktop interactiveness

It's the top three patches here, kernel.org sync sometimes takes a
while...

http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-2.6-block.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/for-linus

--
Jens Axboe



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-03 17:19    [W:0.165 / U:0.372 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site