Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:48:10 +1100 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cfq-prio #2 |
| |
Jens Axboe wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 11 2003, Nick Piggin wrote: > >> >>Jens Axboe wrote: >> >> >>>On Tue, Nov 11 2003, Nick Piggin wrote: >>> >>> >>>>> >>>>Its quite important. If the queue is full, and AS is waiting for a process >>>>to submit a request, its got a long wait. >>>> >>>>Maybe a lower limit for per process nr_requests. Ie. you may queue if this >>>>queue has less than 128 requests _or_ you have less than 8 requests >>>>outstanding. This would solve my problem. It would also give you a much >>>>more >>>>appropriate scaling for server workloads, I think. Still, thats quite a >>>>change in behaviour (simple to code though). >>>> >>>> >>>That basically belongs inside your may_queue for the io scheduler, imo. >>> >>> >>You can force it to disallow the request, but you can't force it to allow >>one (depending on a successful memory allocation, of course). >> > >Well that's back two mails then, make may_queue return whether you must >queue, may queue, or can't queue. >
Yep, sounds good. I'll make a patch for it for 2.6.x > 0 sometime unless you beat me to it.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |