On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 02:48:20PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Aidar Kultayev <the.aidar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > if it wasn't picasa, it would have been something else. I mean if I > > kill picasa ( later on it was done indexing new pics anyway ), it > > would have been for virtualbox to thrash the io. So, nope, getting rid > > of picasa doesn't help either. In general the systems responsiveness > > or sluggishness is dominated by those io operations going on - the DD > > & CP & probably VBOX issuing whole bunch of its load for IO. > > Do you still see high latencies in vfs_lseek() and vfs_fsync()? I'm > not a VFS expert but looking at your latencytop output, it seems that > fsync grabs ->i_mutex which blocks vfs_llseek(), for example. I'm not > sure why that causes high latencies though it's a mutex we're holding. It does. But what workload does a lot of llseeks while fsyncing the same file? I'd bet some application is doing really stupid things here. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>