Re: [PATCH] writeback: Fix broken sync writeback

From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Mon Feb 15 2010 - 19:06:29 EST




On Mon, 15 Feb 2010, Jan Kara wrote:
>
> Personally, I don't see why VM shouldn't generate IO from a single inode
> larger than a few MB for data integrity syncs. There are two reasons I know
> about for MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES:

Two issues:
- it shouldn't matter for performance (if you have a broken disk that
wants multi-megabyte writes to get good performance, you need to fix
the driver, not the VM)
- I generally think that _latency_ is much more important than
throughput, and huge writes are simply bad for latency.

But the real complaint I had about your patch was that it made no sense.

Your statement that it speeds up sync is indicative of some _other_
independent problem (perhaps starting from the beginning of the file each
time? Who knows?) and the patch _clearly_doesn't actually address the
underlying problem, it just changes the logic in a way that makes no
obvious sense to anybody, without actually explaining why it would matter.

So if you can explain _why_ that patch makes such a big difference for
you, and actually write that up, I wouldn't mind it. But right now it was
sent as a voodoo patch with no sensible explanation for why it would
really make any difference, since the outer loop should already do what
the patch does.

Linus
--
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/