On Apr 15, 2010, at 2:32 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 01:05:57AM -0700, Suleiman Souhlal wrote:
On Apr 14, 2010, at 9:11 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
Now, vmscan pageout() is one of IO throuput degression source.
Some IO workload makes very much order-0 allocation and reclaim
and pageout's 4K IOs are making annoying lots seeks.
At least, kswapd can avoid such pageout() because kswapd don't
need to consider OOM-Killer situation. that's no risk.
Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
What's your opinion on trying to cluster the writes done by pageout,
instead of not doing any paging out in kswapd?
XFS already does this in ->writepage to try to minimise the impact
of the way pageout issues IO. It helps, but it is still not as good
as having all the writeback come from the flusher threads because
it's still pretty much random IO.
Doesn't the randomness become irrelevant if you can cluster enough
pages?
And, FWIW, it doesn't solve the stack usage problems, either. In
fact, it will make them worse as write_one_page() puts another
struct writeback_control on the stack...
Sorry, this patch was not meant to solve the stack usage problems.
-- Suleiman
--
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
