On Friday 31 August 2007 14:41, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 04:20:35PM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote:
Resubmitting a bio or submitting a dependent bio from
inside a block driver does not need to be throttled because all
resources required to guarantee completion must
Hi Daniel.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 04:20:35PM -0700, Daniel Phillips ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
On Wednesday 29 August 2007 01:53, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
Then, if of course you will want, which I doubt, you can reread
previous mails and find that it was pointed to that race and
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 04:20:35PM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote:
Resubmitting a bio or submitting a dependent bio from
inside a block driver does not need to be throttled because all
resources required to guarantee completion must have been obtained
_before_ the bio was allowed to proceed
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 02:08:04PM -0700, Daniel Phillips ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
On Tuesday 28 August 2007 10:54, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 10:27:59AM -0700, Daniel Phillips ([EMAIL
PROTECTED]) wrote:
We do not care about one cpu being able to increase its
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 02:57:37PM -0700, Daniel Phillips ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Say Evgeniy, something I was curious about but forgot to ask you
earlier...
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 03:17, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
...All oerations are not atomic, since we do not care about precise
On Tuesday 28 August 2007 02:35, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 02:57:37PM -0700, Daniel Phillips
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Say Evgeniy, something I was curious about but forgot to ask you
earlier...
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 03:17, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
...All
Say Evgeniy, something I was curious about but forgot to ask you
earlier...
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 03:17, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
...All oerations are not atomic, since we do not care about precise
number of bios, but a fact, that we are close or close enough to the
limit.
... in
On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 04:13:10AM -0700, Daniel Phillips ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
On Tuesday 14 August 2007 01:46, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 06:04:06AM -0700, Daniel Phillips
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Perhaps you never worried about the resources that the device
On Tuesday 14 August 2007 05:46, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
The throttling of the virtual device must begin in
generic_make_request and last to -endio. You release the throttle
of the virtual device at the point you remap the bio to an
underlying device, which you have convinced yourself is
On Sunday 12 August 2007 22:36, I wrote:
Note! There are two more issues I forgot to mention earlier.
Oops, and there is also:
3) The bio throttle, which is supposed to prevent deadlock, can itself
deadlock. Let me see if I can remember how it goes.
* generic_make_request puts a bio in
On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 11:44:00PM -0700, Daniel Phillips ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
On Sunday 12 August 2007 22:36, I wrote:
Note! There are two more issues I forgot to mention earlier.
Oops, and there is also:
3) The bio throttle, which is supposed to prevent deadlock, can itself
On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 10:36:23PM -0700, Daniel Phillips ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
(previous incomplete message sent accidentally)
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 02:54, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 10:55:38PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
So, what did we decide? To bloat
On Monday 13 August 2007 01:23, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 10:36:23PM -0700, Daniel Phillips
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
(previous incomplete message sent accidentally)
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 02:54, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 10:55:38PM
On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 04:04:26AM -0700, Daniel Phillips ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
On Monday 13 August 2007 01:14, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
Oops, and there is also:
3) The bio throttle, which is supposed to prevent deadlock, can
itself deadlock. Let me see if I can remember how it
On Monday 13 August 2007 05:04, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 04:04:26AM -0700, Daniel Phillips
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Monday 13 August 2007 01:14, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
Oops, and there is also:
3) The bio throttle, which is supposed to prevent deadlock,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 04:18:03AM -0700, Daniel Phillips ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
No. Since all requests for virtual device end up in physical devices,
which have limits, this mechanism works. Virtual device will
essentially call either generic_make_request() for new physical
device
On Monday 13 August 2007 05:18, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
Say you have a device mapper device with some physical device
sitting underneath, the classic use case for this throttle code.
Say 8,000 threads each submit an IO in parallel. The device mapper
mapping function will be called 8,000
Hi Evgeniy,
Sorry for not getting back to you right away, I was on the road with
limited email access. Incidentally, the reason my mails to you keep
bouncing is, your MTA is picky about my mailer's IP reversing to a real
hostname. I will take care of that pretty soon, but for now my direct
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 02:54, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 10:55:38PM +0200, Jens Axboe
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
So, what did we decide? To bloat bio a bit (add a queue pointer) or
to use physical device limits? The latter requires to replace all
occurence of
(previous incomplete message sent accidentally)
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 02:54, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 10:55:38PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
So, what did we decide? To bloat bio a bit (add a queue pointer) or
to use physical device limits? The latter requires to
20 matches
Mail list logo
