public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
	Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	#@kernel.dk, This@kernel.dk, line@kernel.dk, is@kernel.dk,
	"ignored."@kernel.dk
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/2] Reworking seeky detection for 2.6.34
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:41:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100228184140.GF5768@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1267296340-3820-1-git-send-email-czoccolo@gmail.com>

On Sat, Feb 27 2010, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> 
> Hi, I'm resending the rework seeky detection patch, together with 
> the companion patch for SSDs, in order to get some testing on more
> hardware.
> 
> The first patch in the series fixes a regression introduced in 2.6.33
> for random mmap reads of more than one page, when multiple processes
> are competing for the disk.
> There is at least one HW RAID controller where it reduces performance,
> though (but this controller generally performs worse with CFQ than
> with NOOP, probably because it is performing non-work-conserving 
> I/O scheduling inside), so more testing on RAIDs is appreciated.
> 
> The second patch changes the seeky detection logic to be meaningful
> also for SSDs. A seeky request is one that doesn't utilize the full
> bandwidth for the device. For SSDs, this happens for small requests,
> regardless of their location.
> With this change, the grouping of "seeky" requests done by CFQ can
> result in a fairer distribution of disk service time among processes.

Thanks, I have applied this.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-02-28 18:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1267296340-3820-1-git-send-email-czoccolo@gmail.com>
2010-02-27 18:45 ` [PATCH 1/2] cfq-iosched: rework seeky detection Corrado Zoccolo
2010-02-27 18:45   ` [PATCH 2/2] cfq-iosched: rethink seeky detection for SSDs Corrado Zoccolo
2010-03-01 14:25     ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-03 19:47       ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-03-03 21:21         ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-03 23:28         ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-04 20:34           ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-03-04 22:27             ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-05 22:31               ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-03-08 14:08                 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-02-28 18:41 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2010-03-01 16:35 ` [RFC, PATCH 0/2] Reworking seeky detection for 2.6.34 Vivek Goyal
2010-03-01 19:45   ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-01 23:01   ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-03-03 22:39     ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-03-03 23:11       ` Vivek Goyal

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=20100228184140.GF5768@kernel.dk \
    --to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc="ignored."@kernel.dk \
    --cc=#@kernel.dk \
    --cc=This@kernel.dk \
    --cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
    --cc=guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=is@kernel.dk \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=line@kernel.dk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    /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