lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 15/20] blkio: Take care of preemptions across groups
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:55:58PM +0800, Gui Jianfeng wrote:
>> Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>> o Additional preemption checks for groups where we travel up the hierarchy
>>> and see if one queue should preempt other or not.
>>>
>>> o Also prevents preemption across groups in some cases to provide isolation
>>> between groups.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> block/cfq-iosched.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/block/cfq-iosched.c b/block/cfq-iosched.c
>>> index 87b1799..98dbead 100644
>>> --- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
>>> +++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
>>> @@ -2636,6 +2636,36 @@ cfq_update_idle_window(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *cfqq,
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static bool cfq_should_preempt_group(struct cfq_data *cfqd,
>>> + struct cfq_queue *cfqq, struct cfq_queue *new_cfqq)
>>> +{
>>> + struct cfq_entity *cfqe = &cfqq->entity;
>>> + struct cfq_entity *new_cfqe = &new_cfqq->entity;
>>> +
>>> + if (cfqq_to_cfqg(cfqq) != &cfqd->root_group)
>>> + cfqe = parent_entity(&cfqq->entity);
>>> +
>>> + if (cfqq_to_cfqg(new_cfqq) != &cfqd->root_group)
>>> + new_cfqe = parent_entity(&new_cfqq->entity);
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Allow an RT request to pre-empt an ongoing non-RT cfqq timeslice.
>>> + */
>>> +
>>> + if (new_cfqe->ioprio_class == IOPRIO_CLASS_RT
>>> + && cfqe->ioprio_class != IOPRIO_CLASS_RT)
>>> + return true;
>>> + /*
>>> + * Allow an BE request to pre-empt an ongoing IDLE clas timeslice.
>>> + */
>>> +
>>> + if (new_cfqe->ioprio_class == IOPRIO_CLASS_BE
>>> + && cfqe->ioprio_class == IOPRIO_CLASS_IDLE)
>>> + return true;
>>> +
>>> + return false;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * Check if new_cfqq should preempt the currently active queue. Return 0 for
>>> * no or if we aren't sure, a 1 will cause a preempt.
>>> @@ -2666,6 +2696,9 @@ cfq_should_preempt(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *new_cfqq,
>>> if (rq_is_sync(rq) && !cfq_cfqq_sync(cfqq))
>>> return true;
>>>
>>> + if (cfqq_to_cfqg(new_cfqq) != cfqq_to_cfqg(cfqq))
>>> + return cfq_should_preempt_group(cfqd, cfqq, new_cfqq);
>>> +
>> Vivek, why not put cfq_should_preempt_group() at the beginning of cfq_should_preempt()
>> to prevent preemption across groups?
>
> Hi Gui,
>
> Currently the checks before the group check were not hurting much, that's
> why.
>
> The only contentious check will be if a sync IO in one group should
> preempt the async IO in other group or not.

In my opinion, sync IO should not preempt async one in other group from the fairness point
of view.

Thanks
Gui




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-09 08:47    [W:0.076 / U:1.388 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site