Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 8 Sep 2004 13:05:44 +0200 | From | Jens Axboe <> | Subject | Re: [patch] max-sectors-2.6.9-rc1-bk14-A0 |
| |
On Wed, Sep 08 2004, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de> wrote: > > > Wasn't the move of the ide_lock grabbing enough to solve this problem > > by itself? > > yes and no. It does solve it for the specific case of the > voluntary-preemption patches: there hardirqs can run in separate kernel > threads which are preemptable (no HARDIRQ_OFFSET). In stock Linux > hardirqs are not preemptable so the earlier dropping of ide_lock doesnt > solve the latency. > > so in the upstream kernel the only solution is to reduce the size of IO. > (I'll push the hardirq patches later on too but their acceptance should > not hinder people in achieving good latencies.) It can be useful for > other reasons too to reduce IO, so why not? The patch certainly causes > no overhead anywhere in the block layer and people are happy with it.
I'm not particularly against it, I was just curious. The splitting of max_sectors into a max_hw_sectors is something we need to do anyways, so I'm quite fine with the patch. You can add my signed-off-by too.
-- Jens Axboe
- 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/
| |