User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Which I/O controller is the fairest of them all?

Which I/O controller is the fairest of them all?

Posted May 16, 2009 20:16 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)
In reply to: Which I/O controller is the fairest of them all? by jzbiciak
Parent article: Which I/O controller is the fairest of them all?

It's not obvious why you'd want to ding the owner of a page for the I/O associated with writing it out, unless that task is also blocked waiting for more pages.

I agree. Allocating I/O simply doesn't work in Linux, where most of the I/O is actually done independently by the kernel, not directly by users. The kernel needs instead to allocate among users the user-visible resources that the disk I/O supports. Charge a user for writing to a file. For dirtying a page. For nonlocal memory/file references. You can suspend process execution when these things (in aggregate) go over budget and thereby speed up other processes.

But if we want something small and simple, charging a disk write to the owner of the page does a pretty good approximation of this in some of the most important cases, because in those cases the owning task is blocked waiting for pages because what it's doing is continually writing to disk-backed files, through the cache.


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds