On 8/27/21 6:45 PM, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote: > On 2021/8/27 11:13, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 8/26/21 8:48 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>> With the patch series that is available at >>> https://github.com/bvanassche/linux/tree/block-for-next the same test reports >>> 1090 K IOPS or only 1% below the v5.11 result. I will post that series on the >>> linux-block mailing list after I have finished testing that series. >> >> OK sounds good. I do think we should just do the revert at this point, >> any real fix is going to end up being bigger than I'd like at this >> point. Then we can re-introduce the feature once we're happy with the >> results. > > Yes, It's already rc7 and it's no longer good for big changes. Revert is the > best solution, and apply my patch is a compromise solution. Please take a look at the patch series that is available at https://github.com/bvanassche/linux/tree/block-for-next. Performance for that patch series is significantly better than with your patch. Thanks, Bart.
