On Wed, 2010-11-24 at 20:30 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: > > For the 1-dd case, it looks better to lower the break threshold to > 125ms. After all, it's not easy for the dirty pages to drop by 250ms > worth of data when you only slept 200ms (note: the max pause time has > been doubled mainly for servers). > > - if (nr_dirty < dirty_thresh && > - bdi_prev_dirty - bdi_dirty > (long)bdi->write_bandwidth / 4) > + if (nr_dirty <= dirty_thresh && > + bdi_prev_dirty - bdi_dirty > (long)bdi->write_bandwidth / 8) > break; Hrm, but 125ms worth in 200ms is rather easy, you'd want to keep that limit above what the pause should give you, right? -- 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
