[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: An elevator algorithm (patch)
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 07:17:42AM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> This is a bug in Andrea's idea. The request should only
> be inserted at the end of the list if:
> 1) the block numbre is bigger than head->prev (which you
> already have)

If you read the code you'll see that in his previous patch he wasn't doing
that. That's what I suggested to change to return in O(1) behaviour.

> 2) the block number is smaller than head (or head->next
> if the current request is unplugged)

You're wrong. While the queue is unplugged there are peaks in the queue caused
by the latency control and head->next is not guarnateed to be the lower block
in the queue.

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:39    [W:0.115 / U:4.796 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site