From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:54:15 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle Message-Id: <20091123195415.GA16833@srcf.ucam.org> List-Id: References: <20091118195342.GA13627@srcf.ucam.org> <20091118200712.GA14026@srcf.ucam.org> <20091122233749.GA9699@ucw.cz> <20091123141754.GE8742@kernel.dk> <20091123142557.GA10084@srcf.ucam.org> <20091123143140.GG8742@kernel.dk> <20091123144238.GA10275@srcf.ucam.org> <20091123195000.GK8742@kernel.dk> In-Reply-To: <20091123195000.GK8742@kernel.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jens Axboe Cc: Pavel Machek , Kay Sievers , David Zeuthen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 08:50:00PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: > If the polling works out, then yes that approach is certainly a lot > better from a performance impact pov. > > What kind of time intervals are you targetting? On the order of a second. I'm doing benchmarking with my current implementation now, I'll let you know how it looks. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org