On Wed, Apr 14 2010, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 05:17:04PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > This patch implements a blk_yield to allow a process to voluntarily
> > give up its I/O scheduler time slice. This is desirable for those processes
> > which know that they will be blocked on I/O from another process, such as
> > the file system journal thread. Following patches will put calls to blk_yield
> > into jbd and jbd2.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > block/blk-core.c | 6 ++++
> > block/cfq-iosched.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > block/elevator.c | 8 +++++
> > include/linux/blkdev.h | 1 +
> > include/linux/elevator.h | 3 ++
> > 5 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
> > index 9fe174d..3e4e98c 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-core.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-core.c
> > @@ -323,6 +323,12 @@ void blk_unplug(struct request_queue *q)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_unplug);
> >
> > +void blk_yield(struct request_queue *q)
> > +{
> > + elv_yield(q);
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_yield);
> > +
> > /**
> > * blk_start_queue - restart a previously stopped queue
> > * @q: The &struct request_queue in question
> > diff --git a/block/cfq-iosched.c b/block/cfq-iosched.c
> > index ef59ab3..8a300ab 100644
> > --- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
> > +++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
> > @@ -292,6 +292,7 @@ struct cfq_data {
> > };
> >
> > static struct cfq_group *cfq_get_next_cfqg(struct cfq_data *cfqd);
> > +static void cfq_yield_cfqq(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *cfqq);
> >
> > static struct cfq_rb_root *service_tree_for(struct cfq_group *cfqg,
> > enum wl_prio_t prio,
> > @@ -320,6 +321,7 @@ enum cfqq_state_flags {
> > CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_split_coop, /* shared cfqq will be splitted */
> > CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_deep, /* sync cfqq experienced large depth */
> > CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_wait_busy, /* Waiting for next request */
> > + CFQ_CFQQ_FLAG_yield, /* Allow another cfqq to run */
> > };
> >
> > #define CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(name) \
> > @@ -349,6 +351,7 @@ CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(coop);
> > CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(split_coop);
> > CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(deep);
> > CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(wait_busy);
> > +CFQ_CFQQ_FNS(yield);
> > #undef CFQ_CFQQ_FNS
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_CFQ_IOSCHED
> > @@ -1566,6 +1569,7 @@ __cfq_slice_expired(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *cfqq,
> >
> > cfq_clear_cfqq_wait_request(cfqq);
> > cfq_clear_cfqq_wait_busy(cfqq);
> > + cfq_clear_cfqq_yield(cfqq);
> >
> > /*
> > * If this cfqq is shared between multiple processes, check to
> > @@ -1887,6 +1891,9 @@ static void cfq_dispatch_insert(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq)
> >
> > cfqd->rq_in_flight[cfq_cfqq_sync(cfqq)]++;
> > cfqq->nr_sectors += blk_rq_sectors(rq);
> > +
> > + if (cfq_cfqq_yield(cfqq) && RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&cfqq->sort_list))
> > + cfq_yield_cfqq(cfqd, cfqq);
>
> Jeff,
>
> I am wondering if cfq_select_queue() will be a better place for yielding
> the queue.
>
> if (cfq_cfqq_yield(cfqq) && RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&cfqq->sort_list))
> goto expire;
>
> We can avoid one unnecessary __blk_run_queue().
Agree, doing it on insert is not the right place.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
