Re: [RFC PATCH] block: Fix bio merge induced high I/O latency

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

* Leon Woestenberg (leon.woestenberg@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> Hello Mathieu et al,
> 
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers
> <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > A long standing I/O regression (since 2.6.18, still there today) has hit
> > Slashdot recently :
> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12309
> 
> Are you sure you are solving the *actual* problem?
> 
> The bugzilla entry shows a bisect attempt that leads to a patch
> involving negative clock jumps.
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12309#c29
> 
> with a corrected link to the bisect patch:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12309#c30
> 
> Wouldn't a negative clock jump be very influential to the
> (time-driven) I/O schedulers and be a more probable cause?
> 

When a merge is done, the lowest timestamp between the existing request
and the new request to merge is kept as a start_time value for the
merged request we end up with. In this case, that would probably make
that request stay on top of the queue even if unrelated interactive I/O
requests come.

I suspect that this negative clock jump could have hidden the problem by
making the start time of the interactive request lower than the start
time of the merged request.

Mathieu

> Regards,
> -- 
> Leon
> 
> p.s. Added Thomas to the CC list as his name is on the patch Signed-off-by list.

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/