[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Block IO Controller V4
    On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 09:51:36AM +0800, Gui Jianfeng wrote:
    > Vivek Goyal wrote:
    > > Hi Jens,
    > >
    > > This is V4 of the Block IO controller patches on top of "for-2.6.33" branch
    > > of block tree.
    > >
    > > A consolidated patch can be found here:
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > Hi Vivek,
    > It seems this version doesn't work very well for "direct(O_DIRECT) sequence read" mode.
    > For example, you can create group A and group B, then assign weight 100 to group A and
    > weight 400 to group B, and you run "direct sequence read" workload in group A and B
    > simultaneously. Ideally, we should see 1:4 disk time differentiation for group A and B.
    > But actually, I see almost 1:2 disk time differentiation for group A and B. I'm looking
    > into this issue.
    > BTW, V3 works well for this case.

    Hi Gui,

    In my testing of 8 fio jobs in 8 cgroups, direct sequential reads seems to
    be working fine.

    I suspect that in some case we choose not to idle on the group and it gets
    deleted from service tree hence we loose share. Can you have a look at
    blkio.dequeue files. If there are excessive deletions, that will signify
    that we are loosing share because we chose not to idle.

    If yes, please also run blktrace to see in what cases we chose not to

    In V3, I had a stronger check to idle on the group if it is empty using
    wait_busy() function. In V4 I have removed that and trying to wait busy
    on a queue by extending its slice if it has consumed its allocated slice.


     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-02 15:29    [W:0.020 / U:0.156 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site