lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 2/2] blk-throttle: trim tokens generated for an idle tree
From
Hi, Vivek,

I tested the PATCH v4 for some basic hierarchical setup as I did
before. And I get the similar result.

Preparation
============
1) mount subsys blkio with "__DEVEL__sane_behavior"
2) Create 3 levels of directories under the blkio mount point:
mkdir 1
mkdir 1/2
mkdir 1/2/3
mkdir 4
3) start 4 bash sessions, write their PIDs into:
1/cgroup.procs
1/2/cgroup.procs
1/2/3/cgroup.procs
4/cgroup.procs
4) prepare 4 10MB files on sdb(ext4 fs)

Note: in below hierarchy graph:
"[50k]" means configured value for read_bps_device is 50kB/s
"(50k)" means bandwidth reported by dd is 50kB/s

Test A: 1 process throttled by ancestor group
=============================================
Hierarchy set-up:
(echo "8:16 204800" > 1/blkio.throttle.read_bps_device)
|-- 1 [200k]
| `-- 2 [-]
| `-- 3 [-]
`-- 4 [-]

dd within group 3:
(drop cache then: dd if=10M-file-3 of=/dev/null)
Result:
206kB/s (I did same test without the token-bucket patch, The
result is 205kB/s)

dd within group 2:
(drop cache then: dd if=10M-file-2 of=/dev/null)
Result:
206kB/s


Test B: 4 processes in 3 levels of hierarchy
=============================================
Hierarchy set-up:
echo "8:16 204800" > 1/blkio.throttle.read_bps_device
echo "8:16 102400" > 1/2/blkio.throttle.read_bps_device
echo "8:16 51200" > 1/2/3/blkio.throttle.read_bps_device
echo "8:16 51200" > 4/blkio.throttle.read_bps_device
|-- 1 [200k]
| `-- 2 [100k]
| `-- 3 [50k]
`-- 4 [50k]

start 4 dd processes from 4 bash sessions
(dd if=10M-file-x of=/dev/null)
Result:
|-- 1 (104k)
| `-- 2 (52.1k)
| `-- 3 (51.3k)
`-- 4 (51.4k)


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Hong,
>
> This approach looks good in general. Only downside I can think of
> updation of nr_requests throughout the hierarchy. So deeper the
> hierarchy, higher the overhead.
>
> I am not sure if that's a concern or not. I will have a closer look
> a the patches tomorrow and do some testing too.
>
> Thanks
> Vivek


--
best regards
Hong Zhiguo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-28 06:21    [W:0.056 / U:1.692 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site