Re: [PATCH] livelock in elevator scheduling

From: Jens Axboe (axboe@suse.de)
Date: Sat Dec 02 2000 - 10:42:34 EST

Next message: Donald Becker: "Re: [RFC] Configuring synchronous interfaces in Linux"

Previous message: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: corruption"
In reply to: Russell Cattelan: "Re: [PATCH] livelock in elevator scheduling"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, Dec 01 2000, Russell Cattelan wrote:
> > If performance is down, then that problem is most likely elsewhere.
> > I/O limited benchmarking typically thrives on lots of request
> > latency -- with that comes better throughput for individual threads.
> >
> > > Anyway, I'll try your patch.
>
> Well this patch does help with the request starvation problem.
> Unfortunately it has introduced another problem.
> Running 4 doio programs, on and XFS partion with KIO buf IO turned on.

This looks like a generic aic7xxx problem, and not block related. Since
you are doing such nice traces, what is the other CPU doing? CPU1
seems to be stuck grabbing the io_request_lock (for reasons not entirely
clear from reading the aic7xxx source...)

-- 
* Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
* SuSE Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Donald Becker: "Re: [RFC] Configuring synchronous interfaces in Linux"
Previous message: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: corruption"
In reply to: Russell Cattelan: "Re: [PATCH] livelock in elevator scheduling"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 02 2000 - 10:46:07 EST