Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:52:47 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/7] libata: use lazy workqueues for the pio task |
| |
On 08/24/2009 12:45 PM, John Stoffel wrote: >>>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Garzik<jeff@garzik.org> writes: > Jeff> No objections to the code, operationally... > > Jeff> But it is disappointing that the "1 thread on UP" problem is not > Jeff> solved while changing this libata area. Is there no way to > Jeff> specify a minimum lazy-thread count? > > Jeff> A key problem continues to be tying to the number of CPUs, which > Jeff> is quite inappropriate for libata. > > So should the minimum number be the NumATADisks on the system? Actual > or potential? I've got a system with dual CPUs and two IDE disk, two > SATA disks and two SCSI disks, plus two SCSI Tape drives. All on > seperate controllers... how would that work?
Technically speaking, the maximum is the number of PIO-polling devices.
Theoretically this can change with hotplugging, but that is _very_ rare -- mainly PATA+media bay situations, or bridged SATA with an ancient PATA device.
Jeff
| |