Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1338911

Re: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook

From Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook
Date 2016-02-21 19:10 +0100
Message-ID <r4GCe-1rJ-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <r4kLn-1Ae-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <r4lR8-2q1-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <r4m0N-2IT-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <r4mtR-2SH-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <r4mNb-2Zt-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 09:55:19PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > You're directing this concern to the wrong person.
> > > > 
> > > > I already told you DM is _not_ contributing any extra "bioset" threads
> > > > (ever since commit dbba42d8a).
> > > 
> > > Well, sorry about that. Note that l-k is on the cc list, so hopefully
> > > the right person sees it too.
> > > 
> > > Ok, let me check... it seems that 
> > > 54efd50bfd873e2dbf784e0b21a8027ba4299a3e is responsible, thus Kent
> > > Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com> is to blame.
> > > 
> > > Um, and you acked the patch, so you are partly responsible.
> > 
> > You still haven't shown you even understand the patch so don't try to
> > blame me for one aspect you don't like.
> 
> Well, I don't have to understand the patch to argue its wrong.
> 
> > > > But in general, these "bioset" threads are a side-effect of the
> > > > late-bio-splitting support.  So is your position on it: "I don't like
> > > > that feature if it comes at the expense of adding resources I can _see_
> > > > for something I (naively?) view as useless"?
> > > 
> > > > Just seems... naive... but you could be trying to say something else
> > > > entirely.
> > > 
> > > > Anyway, if you don't like something: understand why it is there and then
> > > > try to fix it to your liking (without compromising why it was there to
> > > > begin with).
> > > 
> > > Well, 28 kernel threads on a notebook is a bug, plain and simple. Do
> > > you argue it is not?
> > 
> > Just implies you have 28 request_queues right?  You clearly have
> > something else going on on your notebook than the average notebook
> > user.
> 
> I'm not using the modules, but otherwise I'm not doing anything
> special. How many request_queues should I expect? How many do you have
> on your notebook?

It's one rescuer thread per bio_set, not one per request queue, so 28 is more
than I'd expect but there's lots of random bio_sets so it's not entirely
unexpected.

It'd be better to have the rescuers be per request_queue, just someone is going
to have to write the code.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2016-02-20 18:50 +0100
  Re: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2016-02-20 19:50 +0100
    Re: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> - 2016-02-20 21:00 +0100
      Re: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2016-02-20 21:10 +0100
        Re: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> - 2016-02-20 21:40 +0100
          Re: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2016-02-20 22:00 +0100
            Re: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 19:10 +0100
              RE: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook Ming Lin-SSI <ming.l@ssi.samsung.com> - 2016-02-21 20:50 +0100
                Re: 4.4-final: 28 bioset threads on small notebook Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com> - 2016-02-21 22:30 +0100

csiph-web