RFC: Changing default filesystem parameters for power management reasons
Eric Sandeen
sandeen at redhat.com
Thu Nov 27 19:16:54 UTC 2008
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 09:59:08AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>
>> What are your plans to measure the results of these changes from power &
>> performance perspectives? Also, tools to monitor what is causing disk
>> accesses might be good (see also Bug 454582 - Tracker bug for
>> over-eager apps that won't let disks spin down).
>
> Power-wise, I have measuring equipment here. Performance is obviously
> harder - I suspect synthetic benchmarks will get much the same
> performance as usual, so that might be down to waiting to see if users
> complain.
>
> It would be nice to have the kernel export disk access via a socket or
> something rather than the currently available debug option, which is to
> dump to dmesg which then triggers log writes which triggers more
> messages and fail occurs. I had a handwavy patch to do that, but we
> probably want a good way of exposing that information to userspace.
Yeah. Although you can tune things so that the block_dump stuff doesn't
go to /var/log/messages, but I'd played tricks in the past with saving
to ramdisks etc for this reason. :)
It'd also be nice if we could reliably query drives for their state, but
in the past the query itself has spun up some of my drives. :)
>> Do you also have any plans for changing default disk spin-down times, or
>> would that be left to bios settings? And if so, we should probably
>> monitor this for how it jives with the expected lifetime of a disk vs.
>> lifetime rating for spindown cycles.
>
> Yes, the long-term plan involves allowing drive spindown. I'm hoping to
> do this adaptively to let us avoid the spinup/down tendancies a static
> timeout provides, but you're right that monitoring SMART information
> would be a pretty important part of that. I lean towards offering it on
> desktops and servers, but not enabled by default.
Sounds good. We don't want a "Fedora kills hard drives!" thread. :)
>> The original laptop mode kit included specific knowledge about some
>> filesystem tuning parameters (commit times etc), is that part of your
>> plan? Which filesystems will be recognized?
>
> Mm. My recollection is that ext3 and xfs had easy to access tuning to
> help in this respect. Changing the kernel defaults would be one option
> there, or alternatively we could update fstab?
Yep, they do. xfs even has a bit of code specifically to work w/ laptop
mode. Looks like the current laptop tools do handle ext3 & xfs from a
cursory glance. Should probably make sure that ext4 is properly handled
too.
-Eric
More information about the devel
mailing list