On Tue, Jan 02 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >On Tue, Jan 02 2007, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>On Tue, Jan 02 2007, Rene Herman wrote:
> >>>Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>On Mon, Jan 01 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>>>>The patch would appear to need this fix:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>--- a/block/cfq-iosched.c~a
> >>>>>+++ a/block/cfq-iosched.c
> >>>>>@@ -592,7 +592,7 @@ static int cfq_allow_merge(request_queue
> >>>>> if (cfqq == RQ_CFQQ(rq))
> >>>>> return 1;
> >>>>>
> >>>>>- return 1;
> >>>>>+ return 0;
> >>>>>}
> >>>>>
> >>>>>static inline void
> >>>>>_
> >>>>>
> >>>>>But that might not fix things...
> >>>>Yeah it is, but I don't think it'll fix it (if anything, it'll be more
> >>>>conservative).
> >>>(to possibly save others from trying -- no, doesn't fix any)
> >>As expected. The issue is rq_is_sync(rq) takes the data direction into
> >>account as well, while bio_sync() only checks the sync bit. This should
> >>fix it.
> >
> >And here a little more relaxed version, as Mark Lord suggested. We allow
> >merge of async bio into a sync request, but not vice versa.
> >
> >Both patches pending testing, will do so now.
>
> Performance is right back where it should be now, thanks!
Good, thanks!
> I did have to massage the second patch to get it to apply cleanly
> after the first patch. You may want to regenerate it against -rc3.
Hmm odd, I thought I did. Will double check.
--
Jens Axboe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
