From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Simplified Readahead
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 02:16:54 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41544876.4040302@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41543FE2.5040807@austin.ibm.com>
Steven Pratt wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>> Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> would like to offer up an alternative simplified design which will
>>> not only make the code easier to maintain,
>>>
>>
>>
>> We won't know that until all functionality is in place.
>>
>>
> Ok, but both you and Nick indicated that the queue congestion isn't
> needed,
I would have thought that always doing the readahead would provide a
more graceful degradation, assuming the readahead algorithm is fairly
accurate, and copes with things like readahead thrashing (which we
hope is the case).
>> I do think we should skip the I/O for POSIX_FADV_WILLNEED against a
>> congested queue. I can't immediately think of a good reason for skipping
>> the I/O for normal readahead.
>>
I don't see why you should skip the readahead for FADVISE_WILLNEED
either. Presumably if someone needs this, they really need it. We
should aim for optimal behaviour when the apis are being used correctly...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-24 16:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-23 16:06 [PATCH/RFC] Simplified Readahead Steven Pratt
2004-09-23 22:14 ` Joel Schopp
2004-09-24 0:21 ` Nick Piggin
2004-09-24 2:42 ` Andrew Morton
2004-09-24 15:40 ` Steven Pratt
2004-09-24 16:16 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2004-09-24 16:48 ` Steven Pratt
2004-09-24 22:05 ` Andrew Morton
2004-09-24 22:43 ` Steven Pratt
2004-09-24 23:01 ` Andrew Morton
2004-09-27 15:39 ` Steven Pratt
2004-09-27 19:26 ` Andrew Morton
2004-09-28 10:13 ` Jens Axboe
2004-09-24 22:55 ` Steven Pratt
2004-09-27 20:29 ` Ray Bryant
2004-09-27 21:04 ` Steven Pratt
2004-09-25 0:45 ` Nick Piggin
2004-09-25 1:01 ` Ram Pai
2004-09-25 6:07 ` Ram Pai
2004-09-27 15:30 ` Steven Pratt
2004-09-27 18:42 ` Ram Pai
2004-09-27 20:07 ` Steven Pratt
2004-09-29 18:46 ` Ram Pai
2004-09-29 22:33 ` Steven Pratt
2004-09-29 23:13 ` Andreas Dilger
2004-09-30 2:26 ` Ram Pai
2004-09-30 5:29 ` Andrew Morton
2004-09-30 20:20 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2004-09-30 1:12 ` Ram Pai
2004-10-01 21:02 ` Steven Pratt
2004-10-05 17:52 ` Ram Pai
[not found] <372479081@toto.iv>
2004-09-24 5:00 ` Peter Chubb
2004-09-24 22:57 ` Steven Pratt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=41544876.4040302@yahoo.com.au \
--to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=slpratt@austin.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.