Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:24:44 +0100 | From | Martin Dalecki <> | Subject | Re: A modest proposal -- We need a patch penguin |
| |
Alan Cox wrote:
>>I still don't think maintainig this array is worth just for hfs >>readahead, so the below patch disables it and gets rid of read_ahead. >> >>Jens, could you check the patch and include it in your next batch of >>block-layer changes for Linus? >> > >What would be significantly more useful would be to make it actually work. >Lots of drivers benefit from control over readahead sizes - both the >stunningly slow low end stuff and the high end raid cards that often want >to get hit by very large I/O requests (eg 128K for the ami megaraid) > No you are wrong. This array is supposed to provide a readahead setting on the driver level, which is bogous, since it's something that *should* not be exposed to the upper layers at all. Please note as well that we have already max_readahead in struut block_device as well. Please note that this array only has a granularity of major block device numbers which is compleatly bogous for example for a disk and cd-rom hanging on a IDE interface. And so on and so on... It's really better to let it go.
- 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/
| |