From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id pBIKRbtp243603 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:27:37 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id G3BDEvbL0Zmvt4uy for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 12:27:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 15:27:34 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: xfs-trace-ilock-more Message-ID: <20111218202734.GB20799@infradead.org> References: <20111214024040.GA17780@infradead.org> <20111214182750.GH11114@wotan.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111214182750.GH11114@wotan.suse.de> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Mark Fasheh Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jeff Mahoney , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:27:50AM -0800, Mark Fasheh wrote: > Hey Christoph, > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 09:40:40PM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Can you explain the story behid this patch in SLES11SP1? > > We were looking at some performance issues and needed a bit more information > on the amount of time spent in ilock. I can give you more specifics if you > want, I just have to dig up the e-mails (it's been a while). Given that the patch is fairly clean can you send it to us for inclusion? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs