Linus wrote:
(Yes, tagged queueing makes it less of an issue, of course. I know,
My observations with (S)ATA tagged/native queuing, is that it doesn't make nearly the difference under Linux that it does under other OSs. Probably because our block layer is so good at ordering requests, either from plugging or simply from clever disk scheduling.
I know. But I _think_ a lot of disks will start seeking for an incoming command the moment they see it, just to get the best latency, rather than wait a millisecond or two to see if they get another request. So even with tagged queuing, the elevator can help, _especially_ for the initial request).
Yup. Agreed! - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- References:
- [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- Prev by Date: Re: OpenGL-based framebuffer concepts
- Next by Date: Re: [patch 2.6.17-rc5 1/2] i386 memcpy: use as few moves as possible for I/O
- Previous by thread: Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- Next by thread: Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?
- Index(es):