On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 18:33:29 +0800 Fengguang Wu <wfg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 11:15:32AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 10:21 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > > > Interestingly, no background_writeout() appears, but only > > > balance_dirty_pages() and wb_kupdate. Obviously wb_kupdate won't > > > block the process. > > > > Yeah, the background threshold is not (yet) scaled. So it can happen > > that the bdi_dirty limit is below the background limit. > > > > I'm curious though as to these stalls, though, I can't seem to think of > > what goes wrong.. esp since most writeback seems to happen from pdflush. > > Me confused too. The new debug patch will confirm whether emerge is > waiting in balance_dirty_pages(). > > > (or I'm totally misreading it - quite a possible as I'm still recovering > > from a serious cold and not all the green stuff has yet figured out its > > proper place wrt brain cells 'n stuff) > > Do take care of yourself. > > > > > I still have this patch floating around: > > I think this patch is OK for 2.6.24 :-) > > Reviewed-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> I would prefer Tested-by: :( > > > > --- > > Subject: mm: speed up writeback ramp-up on clean systems > > > > We allow violation of bdi limits if there is a lot of room on the > > system. Once we hit half the total limit we start enforcing bdi limits > > and bdi ramp-up should happen. Doing it this way avoids many small > > writeouts on an otherwise idle system and should also speed up the > > ramp-up. Given the problems we're having in there I'm a bit reluctant to go tossing hastily put together and inadequately tested stuff onto the fire. And that's what this patch looks like to me. Wanna convince me otherwise? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
