[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: stochastic fair queueing in the elevator [Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.4.20-ck3 / aa / rmap with contest]
    Andrew Morton wrote:

    >Nick Piggin <> wrote:
    >>That is what I can't understand. Movement of the disk head should
    >>be exactly the same in either situation and 128K is not exactly
    >>a pitiful request size - so it suggests a quirk somewhere. It
    >>is not as if the disk has to be particularly smart or know a
    >>lot about the data in order to optimise the head movement for
    >>a load like this.
    >Yes, that's a bit odd. Some reduction in CPU cost and bus
    >traffic, etc would be expected. Could be that sending out a
    >request which is larger than a track is saving a rev of the disk
    >for some reason.
    Shouldn't be. Even at 128KB readahead we should always have
    outstanding requests against the disk in a streaming read
    scenario, right? Maybe if the track buffers are bigger than

    Is there a magic number above which you see the improvement,
    Andrea? Or does it steadily climb?

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.018 / U:3.060 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site