lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Block IO Controller V4
On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 04:45:49PM +0800, Gui Jianfeng wrote:
> Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 01:10:03PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >
> > [..]
> >> Hi Gui,
> >>
> >> Can you please try following patch and see if it helps you. If not, then
> >> we need to figure out why we choose to not idle and delete the group from
> >> service tree.
> >>
> >
> > Hi Gui,
> >
> > Please try this version of the patch instead of previous one. During more
> > testing I saw some additional deletions where we should have waited and
> > the reason being that we were hitting boundary condition. At the request
> > completion time slice has not expired but after 4-5 ns, select_queue hits
> > and jiffy has incremented by then and slice expires.
> >
> > ttime_mean, is not covering this condition because this workload is so
> > sequential that ttime_mean=0.
> >
> > So I am checking for new condition where if we are into last ms of slice,
> > mark the queue wait_busy.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Vivek
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
>
> Hi, Vivek
>
> I add some debug message in select_queue, it does meet the boundary condition.
> I tried this patch, and works fine on my box.
>
> Acked-by: Gui Jianfeng <guijiafneng@cn.fujitsu.com>

Thanks Gui, I will send this patch to Jens in a separate mail.

Thanks
Vivek


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-07 16:29    [W:0.060 / U:5.872 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site