Hi Fengguang,
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:47:19PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
>> On 10/26/2012 03:36 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>> >On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:19:57PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
>> >>On 10/26/2012 03:09 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>> >
On 10/26/2012 04:02 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:47:19PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
On 10/26/2012 03:36 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:19:57PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
On 10/26/2012 03:09 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:03:12PM +0
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:47:19PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 10/26/2012 03:36 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> >On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:19:57PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> >>On 10/26/2012 03:09 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:03:12PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 10
On 10/26/2012 03:36 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:19:57PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
On 10/26/2012 03:09 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:03:12PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
On 10/26/2012 02:58 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
static void shrink_readahead_size_e
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:19:57PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 10/26/2012 03:09 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> >On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:03:12PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> >>On 10/26/2012 02:58 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> static void shrink_readahead_size_eio(struct file *filp,
>
On 10/26/2012 03:09 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:03:12PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
On 10/26/2012 02:58 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
static void shrink_readahead_size_eio(struct file *filp,
struct file_ra_state *ra)
{
- ra->ra_
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:03:12PM +0800, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 10/26/2012 02:58 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> >> static void shrink_readahead_size_eio(struct file *filp,
> >> struct file_ra_state *ra)
> >> {
> >>- ra->ra_pages /= 4;
> >>+ spin_l
On 10/26/2012 02:58 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
static void shrink_readahead_size_eio(struct file *filp,
struct file_ra_state *ra)
{
- ra->ra_pages /= 4;
+ spin_lock(&filp->f_lock);
+ filp->f_mode |= FMODE_RANDOM;
+ spin_unlock(&fil
> static void shrink_readahead_size_eio(struct file *filp,
> struct file_ra_state *ra)
> {
> - ra->ra_pages /= 4;
> + spin_lock(&filp->f_lock);
> + filp->f_mode |= FMODE_RANDOM;
> + spin_unlock(&filp->f_lock);
>
> As the example in
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:38:11AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58:26AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>> >> Hi Chen,
>> >>
>> >> > But how can bdi related ra_
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 10/26/2012 11:28 AM, YingHang Zhu wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ni zhan Chen
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/26/2012 09:27 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:25:44AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:38:11AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58:26AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> >> Hi Chen,
> >>
> >> > But how can bdi related ra_pages reflect different files' readahead
> >> > window? Maybe
On 10/26/2012 11:28 AM, YingHang Zhu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
On 10/26/2012 09:27 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:25:44AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58:26AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
Hi Chen,
But how can bdi
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58:26AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>> Hi Chen,
>>
>> > But how can bdi related ra_pages reflect different files' readahead
>> > window? Maybe these different files are sequential read, random read
>> > and so on.
>>
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 10/26/2012 09:27 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:25:44AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58:26AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
Hi Chen,
> But how can bdi related ra_pag
On 10/26/2012 09:27 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:25:44AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58:26AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
Hi Chen,
But how can bdi related ra_pages reflect different files' readahead
window? Maybe these different files are sequenti
On 10/26/2012 08:25 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58:26AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
Hi Chen,
But how can bdi related ra_pages reflect different files' readahead
window? Maybe these different files are sequential read, random read
and so on.
It's simple: sequential reads
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:25:44AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58:26AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > Hi Chen,
> >
> > > But how can bdi related ra_pages reflect different files' readahead
> > > window? Maybe these different files are sequential read, random read
> > >
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58:26AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Hi Chen,
>
> > But how can bdi related ra_pages reflect different files' readahead
> > window? Maybe these different files are sequential read, random read
> > and so on.
>
> It's simple: sequential reads will get ra_pages readahead
Hi Chen,
> But how can bdi related ra_pages reflect different files' readahead
> window? Maybe these different files are sequential read, random read
> and so on.
It's simple: sequential reads will get ra_pages readahead size while
random reads will not get readahead at all.
Talking about the be
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Hi Chen,
>
>> But how can bdi related ra_pages reflect different files' readahead
>> window? Maybe these different files are sequential read, random read
>> and so on.
>
> It's simple: sequential reads will get ra_pages readahead size while
>
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Hi YingHang,
>
>> Actually I've talked about it with Fengguang, he advised we should unify the
>> ra_pages in struct bdi and file_ra_state and leave the issue that
>> spreading data
>> across disks as it is.
>> Fengguang, what's you opinion a
Hi YingHang,
> Actually I've talked about it with Fengguang, he advised we should unify the
> ra_pages in struct bdi and file_ra_state and leave the issue that
> spreading data
> across disks as it is.
> Fengguang, what's you opinion about this?
Yeah the two ra_pages may run out of sync for alrea
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 10/25/2012 10:04 AM, YingHang Zhu wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 08:17:05AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Dave Chinner
wrote:
On 10/25/2012 10:04 AM, YingHang Zhu wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 08:17:05AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 07:53:59AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
Hi Dave,
On Wed,
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 08:17:05AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 07:53:59AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
>> >> Hi Dave,
>> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Dav
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 08:17:05AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 07:53:59AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
> >> Hi Dave,
> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:46:51PM
On 10/25/2012 08:17 AM, YingHang Zhu wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 07:53:59AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
Hi Dave,
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:46:51PM +0800, Ying Zhu wrote:
Hi,
Recen
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 07:53:59AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
>> Hi Dave,
>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:46:51PM +0800, Ying Zhu wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >> Recently we ran into the bug th
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 07:53:59AM +0800, YingHang Zhu wrote:
> Hi Dave,
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:46:51PM +0800, Ying Zhu wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> Recently we ran into the bug that an opened file's ra_pages does not
> >> synchronize with i
Hi Chen,
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 10/23/2012 09:41 PM, YingHang Zhu wrote:
>>
>> Sorry for the annoying, I forgot ccs in the previous mail.
>> Thanks,
>> Ying Zhu
>> Hi Chen,
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Ni zhan Chen
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/23
On 10/23/2012 09:41 PM, YingHang Zhu wrote:
Sorry for the annoying, I forgot ccs in the previous mail.
Thanks,
Ying Zhu
Hi Chen,
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
On 10/23/2012 08:46 PM, Ying Zhu wrote:
Hi,
Recently we ran into the bug that an opened file's ra
Hi Dave,
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:46:51PM +0800, Ying Zhu wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Recently we ran into the bug that an opened file's ra_pages does not
>> synchronize with it's backing device's when the latter is changed
>> with blockdev --setra,
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:46:51PM +0800, Ying Zhu wrote:
> Hi,
> Recently we ran into the bug that an opened file's ra_pages does not
> synchronize with it's backing device's when the latter is changed
> with blockdev --setra, the application needs to reopen the file
> to know the change,
or si
Sorry for the annoying, I forgot ccs in the previous mail.
Thanks,
Ying Zhu
Hi Chen,
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 10/23/2012 08:46 PM, Ying Zhu wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>Recently we ran into the bug that an opened file's ra_pages does not
>> synchronize with it'
On 10/23/2012 08:46 PM, Ying Zhu wrote:
Hi,
Recently we ran into the bug that an opened file's ra_pages does not
synchronize with it's backing device's when the latter is changed
with blockdev --setra, the application needs to reopen the file
to know the change, which is inappropriate under ou
Hi,
Recently we ran into the bug that an opened file's ra_pages does not
synchronize with it's backing device's when the latter is changed
with blockdev --setra, the application needs to reopen the file
to know the change, which is inappropriate under our circumstances.
This bug is also mentioned
37 matches
Mail list logo
