From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261839AbVFPWwL (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2005 18:52:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261849AbVFPWvf (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2005 18:51:35 -0400 Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.146]:27317 "EHLO e6.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261878AbVFPWt3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2005 18:49:29 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.6.12-rc6-mm1 & 2K lun testing From: Badari Pulavarty To: William Lee Irwin III Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-mm@kvack.org In-Reply-To: <20050616224230.GD3913@holomorphy.com> References: <1118856977.4301.406.camel@dyn9047017072.beaverton.ibm.com> <20050616002451.01f7e9ed.akpm@osdl.org> <1118951458.4301.478.camel@dyn9047017072.beaverton.ibm.com> <20050616224230.GD3913@holomorphy.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1118960737.4301.483.camel@dyn9047017072.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 16 Jun 2005 15:25:42 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 15:42, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 12:50:59PM -0700, Badari Pulavarty wrote: > > Yes. I am using CFQ scheduler. I changed nr_requests to 4 for all > > my devices. I also changed "min_free_kbytes" to 64M. > > Response time is still bad. Here is the vmstat, meminfo, slabinfo > > and profle output. I am not sure why profile output shows > > default_idle(), when vmstat shows 100% CPU sys. > > It's because you're sorting on the third field of readprofile(1), > which is pure gibberish. Undoing this mistake will immediately > enlighten you. Hmm.. I was under the impression that its gives useful info .. Here is readprofile man-page says: Print the 20 most loaded procedures: readprofile | sort -nr +2 | head -20 > Also, turn off slab poisoning when doing performance analyses. Its already off. I am not trying to compare performance here. I was trying to analyze VM behaviour with filesystem tests. (with "raw" devices, machine is perfectly happy - but with filesystem cache it crawls). Thanks, Badari