Re: [PATCH RFC] jbd: don't wake kjournald unnecessarily

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Dec 19, 2012, at 2:27 PM, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 06:14:01PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
>>  I agree. Just I'm still somewhat puzzled by those two reports pointed to
>> by Eric. In both cases stored tids were 0 and I cannot see how that happens
>> (well how it could happen in a reasonably likely way).
> 
> I'm also really puzzled about how Eric's patch makes a 10% different
> on the AIM7 benchmark; as you've pointed out, that will just cause an
> extra wakeup of the jbd/jbd2 thread, which should then quickly check
> and decide to go back to sleep.

TBH I'm puzzled too, but that's what the perf guys tell me...

Eric

>                    - Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Ceph FS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite National Park]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux