From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965035AbVLVC0w (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 21:26:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965037AbVLVC0w (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 21:26:52 -0500 Received: from omta03ps.mx.bigpond.com ([144.140.82.155]:17119 "EHLO omta03ps.mx.bigpond.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965035AbVLVC0w (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 21:26:52 -0500 Message-ID: <43AA0EEA.8070205@bigpond.net.au> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 13:26:50 +1100 From: Peter Williams User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Trond Myklebust CC: Kyle Moffett , Ingo Molnar , Con Kolivas , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Fix adverse effects of NFS client on interactive response References: <43A8EF87.1080108@bigpond.net.au> <1135145341.7910.17.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <43A8F714.4020406@bigpond.net.au> <1135171280.7958.16.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <962C9716-6F84-477B-8B2A-FA771C21CDE8@mac.com> <1135172453.7958.26.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> In-Reply-To: <1135172453.7958.26.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at omta03ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.133.38] using ID pwil3058@bigpond.net.au at Thu, 22 Dec 2005 02:26:50 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 08:36 -0500, Kyle Moffett wrote: > >>On Dec 21, 2005, at 08:21, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> >>>...and if you stick in a faster server?... >>> >>>There is _NO_ fundamental difference between NFS and a local >>>filesystem that warrants marking one as "interactive" and the other >>>as "noninteractive". What you are basically saying is that all I/O >>>should be marked as TASK_NONINTERACTIVE. >> >>Uhh, what part of disk/NFS/filesystem access is "interactive"? Which >>of those sleeps directly involve responding to user-interface >>events? _That_ is the whole point of the interactivity bonus, and >>precisely why Ingo introduced TASK_NONINTERACTIVE sleeps; so that >>processes that are not being useful for interactivity could be moved >>away from TASK_NONINTERRUPTABLE, with the end result that the X- >>server could be run at priority 0 without harming interactivity, even >>during heavy *disk*, *NFS*, and *network* activity. Admittedly, that >>may not be what some people want, but they're welcome to turn off the >>interactivity bonuses via some file in /proc (sorry, don't remember >>which at the moment). > > > Then have io_schedule() automatically set that flag, and convert NFS to > use io_schedule(), or something along those lines. I don't want a bunch > of RT-specific flags littering the NFS/RPC code. This flag isn't RT-specific. It's used in the scheduling SCHED_NORMAL tasks and has no other semantic effects. Peter -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce