lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ide write barriers
Date
On Wednesday 05 February 2003 17:33, Jens Axboe wrote:

Hi Jens,

> Sure, I had that one already. BTW, I discovered that the default io
thank you :)

> scheduler forgets to honor the cmd_flags, it's supposed to break like
> the noop does (see very first hunk in very first file). Must have
> removed that by mistake some time ago... This applies both to the
> 2.4.21-pre4 patch posted and this one.
well, I am impressed, really!

As you described in the patch:

+ * For journalled file systems, doing ordered writes on a commit
+ * block instead of explicitly doing wait_on_buffer (which is bad
+ * for performance) can be a big win. Block drivers supporting this
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I don't have benchmarks handy yet but as far as I can _feel_, this is a _MUST_
(I repeat: a _MUST_ for 2.4.21). And I am very good in feeling slowdowns for
interactivity :)

I am running it for quite some hours now with 2.4.20. Well, maybe the
nr_requests = 16 and read/write passovers changes in the elevator code give
us more smoothness than w/o but in my theoretical mind, this should drop
throughput. I also noticed, these changes aren't in your 2.4.21 patch. Can
you explain why it is in 2.4.20 patch or why it isn't in 2.4.21 patch ? :)

Thanks alot.

/ME calls out for Con to do a benchmark with the 2.4.21 patch.

ciao, Marc


-
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 13:32    [W:0.041 / U:0.284 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site