Re: Backport request to stable of two performance related fixes for xen-blkfront (3.13 fixes to earlier trees)

[Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>]

On 06/06/2014 04:02 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 06:56:57AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 12:47:07PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>> On 06/04/2014 07:48 AM, Greg KH wrote:
>>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 03:11:22PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>>>> Hey Greg
>>>>>
>>>>> This email is in regards to backporting two patches to stable that
>>>>> fall under the 'performance' rule:
>>>>>
>>>>>  bfe11d6de1c416cea4f3f0f35f864162063ce3fa
>>>>>  fbe363c476afe8ec992d3baf682670a4bd1b6ce6
>>>>
>>>> Now queued up, thanks.
>>>
>>> AFAIU, they introduce a performance regression.
>>
>> That "regression" is also in mainline, right?  As Konrad doesn't seem to
>> think it matters, I'm deferring to the maintainer here.
> 
> Hehe.
> 
> Greg is correct - the performance regression with tmpfs/ramfs does exist
> upstream and once a fix has been established will be dealt with. Right now we
> are fousing on the 99% usage models which is solid state, rotational,
> and flash (just got one of those) and the two patches outlined above are
> needed for the stable trees.

Ok, I wanted to be sure before I take these to 3.12.

Thanks.

-- 
js
suse labs