Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

FreeBSD: reduce priority of ZIO_TASKQ_ISSUE writes by a larger value. #10872

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 4, 2020

Conversation

mattmacy
Copy link
Contributor

@mattmacy mattmacy commented Sep 2, 2020

On FreeBSD, if priorities divided by four (RQ_PPQ) are equal then
a difference between them is insignificant. In other words,
incrementing pri by only one as on Linux is insufficient.

Signed-off-by: Matt Macy [email protected]

Motivation and Context

Description

How Has This Been Tested?

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Performance enhancement (non-breaking change which improves efficiency)
  • Code cleanup (non-breaking change which makes code smaller or more readable)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • Documentation (a change to man pages or other documentation)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the ZFS on Linux code style requirements.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the contributing document.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • I have run the ZFS Test Suite with this change applied.
  • All commit messages are properly formatted and contain Signed-off-by.

On FreeBSD, if priorities divided by four (RQ_PPQ) are equal then
a difference between them is insignificant. In other words,
incrementing pri by only one as on Linux is insufficient.

Signed-off-by: Matt Macy <[email protected]>
@behlendorf behlendorf added the Status: Code Review Needed Ready for review and testing label Sep 3, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@behlendorf behlendorf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It may be that increasing by 4 on Linux would also be preferable. But until we can test that this LGTM.

@behlendorf behlendorf added Status: Accepted Ready to integrate (reviewed, tested) and removed Status: Code Review Needed Ready for review and testing labels Sep 3, 2020
@behlendorf behlendorf merged commit 7432d29 into openzfs:master Sep 4, 2020
behlendorf pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2020
On FreeBSD, if priorities divided by four (RQ_PPQ) are equal then
a difference between them is insignificant. In other words,
incrementing pri by only one as on Linux is insufficient.

Reviewed-by: Alexander Motin <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Matt Macy <[email protected]>
Closes #10872
@mattmacy mattmacy deleted the projects/spa_taskqs_init branch September 10, 2020 23:00
jsai20 pushed a commit to jsai20/zfs that referenced this pull request Mar 30, 2021
On FreeBSD, if priorities divided by four (RQ_PPQ) are equal then
a difference between them is insignificant. In other words,
incrementing pri by only one as on Linux is insufficient.

Reviewed-by: Alexander Motin <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Matt Macy <[email protected]>
Closes openzfs#10872
sempervictus pushed a commit to sempervictus/zfs that referenced this pull request May 31, 2021
On FreeBSD, if priorities divided by four (RQ_PPQ) are equal then
a difference between them is insignificant. In other words,
incrementing pri by only one as on Linux is insufficient.

Reviewed-by: Alexander Motin <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Matt Macy <[email protected]>
Closes openzfs#10872
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Status: Accepted Ready to integrate (reviewed, tested)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants