Re: [PATCH 11/18] block: add bdi flag to indicate risk of io queue underrun

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, 2011-09-04 at 09:53 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> +++ linux-next/mm/page-writeback.c      2011-08-31 14:40:58.000000000 +0800
> @@ -1067,6 +1067,9 @@ static void balance_dirty_pages(struct a
>                                      nr_dirty, bdi_thresh, bdi_dirty,
>                                      start_time);
>  
> +               if (unlikely(!dirty_exceeded && bdi_async_underrun(bdi)))
> +                       break;
> +
>                 dirty_ratelimit = bdi->dirty_ratelimit;
>                 pos_ratio = bdi_position_ratio(bdi, dirty_thresh,
>                                                background_thresh, nr_dirty,

So dirty_exceeded looks like:


1109                 dirty_exceeded = (bdi_dirty > bdi_thresh) ||
1110                                   (nr_dirty > dirty_thresh);

Would it make sense to write it as:

	if (nr_dirty > dirty_thresh || 
	    (nr_dirty > freerun && bdi_dirty > bdi_thresh))
		dirty_exceeded = 1;

So that we don't actually throttle bdi thingies when we're still in the
freerun area?

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]