From: Zach Brown <zach.brown@oracle.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
jdike@addtoit.com, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6.24 BUG] 100% iowait on host while UML is running
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 10:53:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <475450A1.9000103@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x49ir3fhg5n.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
> We could check ctx->reqs_active before scheduling to determine whether
> or not we are waiting for I/O, but this would require taking the
> context lock in order to be accurate. Given that the test would be
> only for the sake of book keeping, it might be okay to do it outside
> of the lock.
>
> Zach, what are your thoughts on this?
I agree that it'd be OK to test it outside the lock, though we'll want
some commentary:
/* Try to only show up in io wait if there are ops in flight */
if (ctx->reqs_active)
io_schedule();
else
schedule();
It's cheap, safe, and accurate the overwhelming majority of the time :).
We only need it in read_events(). The other two io_schedule() calls are
only reached to wait on pending reqs specifically.
It still won't make sense for iocbs which aren't performing IO, but I
guess that's one more bridge to cross when we come to it.
Do you want to throw this tiny patch together and submit it?
- z
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-03 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-03 15:32 [2.6.24 BUG] 100% iowait on host while UML is running Miklos Szeredi
2007-12-03 16:55 ` Jeff Moyer
2007-12-03 18:53 ` Zach Brown [this message]
2007-12-03 19:33 ` Jeff Moyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=475450A1.9000103@oracle.com \
--to=zach.brown@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).