From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264715AbUEJOqW (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2004 10:46:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264718AbUEJOqV (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2004 10:46:21 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:54734 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264715AbUEJOpE (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2004 10:45:04 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 16:44:55 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Nick Piggin Cc: "Chen, Kenneth W" , "'Andrew Morton'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Cache queue_congestion_on/off_threshold Message-ID: <20040510144454.GH14403@suse.de> References: <20040507093921.GD21109@suse.de> <200405072200.i47M0AF00868@unix-os.sc.intel.com> <20040510143024.GF14403@suse.de> <409F9510.9050001@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <409F9510.9050001@yahoo.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 11 2004, Nick Piggin wrote: > Jens Axboe wrote: > >On Fri, May 07 2004, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > > > >>>>>>Jens Axboe wrote on Friday, May 07, 2004 2:39 AM > >>> > >>>On Thu, May 06 2004, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > >>> > >>>>(3) can we allocate request structure up front in __make_request? > >>>> For I/O that cannot be merged, the elevator code executes twice > >>>> in __make_request. > >>>> > >>> > >>>Actually, with the good working batching we might get away with killing > >>>freereq completely. Have you tested that (if not, could you?) > >> > >>Sorry, I'm clueless on "good working batching". If you could please give > >>me some pointers, I will definitely test it. > > > > > >Something like this. > > > > While we're doing that can we drop the GFP_ATOMIC allocation > completely? Thought the same thing. But lets stick to single item tests first, then we can kill that double allocation after. -- Jens Axboe