Re: Processes stuck on D state on Dual Opteron

[Nick Piggin]

Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> > Actually the patches I have sent you do fix real bugs, but they also
> > make the block layer less likely to recurse into page reclaim, so it
> > may be eg. hiding the problem that Neil's patch fixes.
>
>
> Jens Axboe wrote on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:08 AM
>
> > Can you push those to Andrew? I'm quite happy with the way they turned
> > out. It would be nice if Ken would bench 2.6.12-rc2 with and without
> > those patches.
>
>
>
> I like the patch a lot and already did bench it on our db setup.  However,
> I'm seeing a negative regression compare to a very very crappy patch (see
> attached, you can laugh at me for doing things like that :-).

OK - if we go that way, perhaps the following patch may be the
way to do it.

> My first reaction is that the overhead is in wait queue setup and tear down
> in get_request_wait function. Throwing the following patch on top does improve
> things a bit, but we are still in the negative territory.  I can't explain why.
> Everything suppose to be faster.  So I'm staring at the execution profile at
> the moment.

Hmm, that's a bit disappointing. Like you said though, I'm sure we
should be able to get better performance out of this.

I'll look at it and see if we can rework it.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/