Re: [PATCH 00/13] IO-less dirty throttling v2

[Andrew Morton]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:06:40 +1100 Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 03:03:30PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:27:20 +0800
> > Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > On a simple test of 100 dd, it reduces the CPU %system time from 30% to 3%, and
> > > improves IO throughput from 38MB/s to 42MB/s.
> > 
> > The changes in CPU consumption are remarkable.  I've looked through the
> > changelogs but cannot find mention of where all that time was being
> > spent?
> 
> In the writeback path, mostly because every CPU is trying to run
> writeback at the same time and causing contention on locks and
> shared structures in the writeback path. That no longer happens
> because writeback is only happening from one thread instead of from
> all CPUs at once.

It'd be nice to see this quantified.  Partly because handing things
over to kernel threads uncurs extra overhead - scheduling cost and CPU
cache footprint.

But mainly because we're taking the work accounting away from the user
who caused it and crediting it to the kernel thread instead, and that's
an actively *bad* thing to do.

--
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/