lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [patch 0/3] j_state_lock, j_list_lock, remove-bitlocks
    From
    Date
    On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 01:58 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
    >
    > On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Lee Revell wrote:
    > >
    > > OK, no need to cc: me on this one any more. It's really low priority
    > > IMO compared to the big latencies I am seeing with ext3 and
    > > "data=ordered". Unless you think there is any relation.
    > >
    >
    > IMO a deadlock is higher priority than a big latency :-)
    >

    Of course, if I was hitting the deadlock in normal use.

    > I still belive that something to do with the locking in ext3 has to do
    > with your latencies, but I'll take you off when I send something to Andrew
    > or Ingo next time. Hopefully, they'll do the same.

    If you suspect they are related then yes I would like to be copied.

    >
    > When this problem is solved on Ingo's side, maybe this will solve your
    > latency problem, so I recommend that you keep trying the latest RT
    > kernels. BTW what test are you running that causes these latencies?

    dbench 16

    Lee

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:11    [W:4.167 / U:0.060 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site