From: Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: ornati@lycos.it, gandalf@wlug.westbo.se, linuxram@us.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Buffer and Page cache coherent? was: Strange IDE performance change in 2.6.1-rc1 (again)
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:22:31 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040104232231.GV1882@matchmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040104141030.02fbcce5.akpm@osdl.org>
On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 02:10:30PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 02:40:03PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > No effort was made to optimise buffered blockdev reads because it is not
> > > very important and my main interest was in data coherency and filesystem
> > > metadata consistency.
> >
> > Does that mean that blockdev reads will populate the pagecache in 2.6?
>
> They have since 2.4.10. The pagecache is the only cacheing entity for file
> (and blockdev) data.
There was a large thread after 2.4.10 was released about speeding up the
boot proces by reading the underlying blockdev of the root partition in
block order.
Unfortunately at the time reading the files through the pagecache would
cause a second read of the data even if it was already buffered. I don't
remember the exact details.
Are you saying this is now resolved? And the above optimization will work?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-04 23:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-02 16:02 Strange IDE performance change in 2.6.1-rc1 (again) Paolo Ornati
2004-01-02 18:08 ` Ed Sweetman
2004-01-02 21:04 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-01-02 21:27 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-01-03 10:20 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-01-02 21:32 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-02 22:34 ` Martin Josefsson
2004-01-03 11:13 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-01-03 22:40 ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-04 14:30 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-01-05 23:19 ` Ram Pai
2004-01-07 14:59 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-01-07 19:23 ` Ram Pai
2004-01-07 20:12 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-01-07 23:57 ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-08 7:31 ` Ram Pai
2004-01-09 1:05 ` Ram Pai
2004-01-09 1:17 ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-09 19:15 ` Ram Pai
2004-01-09 19:44 ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-10 14:48 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-01-10 16:00 ` Ed Sweetman
2004-01-10 16:19 ` Ed Sweetman
2004-01-10 17:29 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-01-10 17:29 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-03-29 15:45 ` Ram Pai
2004-01-04 17:15 ` Buffer and Page cache coherent? was: " Mike Fedyk
2004-01-04 22:10 ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-04 23:22 ` Mike Fedyk [this message]
2004-01-04 23:32 ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-04 23:45 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-05 0:23 ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-03 10:20 ` Paolo Ornati
2004-01-03 3:33 ` Tobias Diedrich
2004-01-03 4:15 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-01-03 13:39 ` Tobias Diedrich
2004-01-03 20:56 ` Tobias Diedrich
2004-01-04 3:02 ` jw schultz
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=20040104232231.GV1882@matchmail.com \
--to=mfedyk@matchmail.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=gandalf@wlug.westbo.se \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ornati@lycos.it \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox