From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 3 May 2001 06:47:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 3 May 2001 06:47:33 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:16650 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 3 May 2001 06:47:16 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 12:46:47 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Shaun Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Disk Performance Measurements Message-ID: <20010503124647.F16507@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20010502124445.J25336@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from delius@progsoc.uts.edu.au on Thu, May 03, 2001 at 07:59:53AM +1000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 03 2001, Shaun wrote: > Again, this isn't the case in the 2.2.16 kernel I'm working with. Each > call to make_request() causes pgin/pgout to be incremented, since these > requests can be of different sizes (even for the same disk) I can't see > how a kb value can be deduced. Check if the latest 2.2 is correct then, 2.4 is. > Just as a question though, a disk/partition doesn't need to have a > filesystem on it, so why is the "correct_size" for a buffer request on the > block device defined based on a filesystem block system? It's not, but the fs may set the block size (ext2 does). -- Jens Axboe