Messages in this thread |  | | | From | "Hua Zhong" <> | | Subject | RE: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes | | Date | Mon, 6 Apr 2009 13:12:08 -0700 |
| |
Grr..making writeback as default would break people's setup that relies on the ordered semantics, especially in the embedded world. It's a big no-no.
> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-kernel- > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Linus Torvalds > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 12:57 PM > To: Theodore Tso > Cc: Jens Axboe; Linux Kernel Mailing List > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes > > > > On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Theodore Tso wrote: > > > > Cool! Maybe we can make things even better, but given where we are > > at, this brings up an question: given Jens block latency patches > > (thanks, Jens!), and the patches which add the flush on > > replace-via-rename/replace-via-truncate for ext3 data=writeback, > > should we make ext3 data=writeback the default for 2.6.30? > > Yes. I want to go back and see how much this all helps for the > data=ordered case (if at all), but I think we should at least consider > trying 'data=writeback' as a default. > > Does the 'synchronize on rename / close-after-ftrucate' patches leave > any > other intersting cases open? > > Linus > -- > 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/
|  |