Re: [PATCH] io stalls

From: Chris Mason (mason@suse.com)
Date: Wed Jun 11 2003 - 21:22:28 EST


On Wed, 2003-06-11 at 21:29, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

> this will avoid get_request_wait_wakeup to mess the wakeup, so we can
> wakep_nr(rq.count) safely.
>
> then there's the last issue raised by Chris, that is if we get request
> released faster than the tasks can run, still we can generate a not
> perfect fairness. My solution to that is to change wake_up to have a
> nr_exclusive not obeying to the try_to_wakeup retval. that should
> guarantee exact FIFO then, but it's a minor issue because the requests
> shouldn't be released systematically in a flood. So I'm leaving it
> opened for now, the others already addressed should be the major ones.

I think the only time we really need to wakeup more than one waiter is
when we hit the q->batch_request mark. After that, each new request
that is freed can be matched with a single waiter, and we know that any
previously finished requests have probably already been matched to their
own waiter.

-chris

-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 15 2003 - 22:00:30 EST