Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] I/O error handling and fsync()

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

 



On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 06:31:57PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> 
> Ahh, sorry if I wasn't clear.
> 
> I know Kevin posed this topic in the context of QEMU/KVM, and I figure
> that running virt guests (themselves doing all sorts of workloads) is a
> pretty common setup these days. That was what I meant by "use case"
> here. Obviously there are many other workloads that could benefit from
> (or be harmed by) changes in this area.
> 
> Still, I think that looking at QEMU/KVM as a "application" and
> considering what we can do to help optimize that case could be helpful
> here (and might also be helpful for other workloads).

Well, except for QEMU/KVM, Kevin has already confirmed that using
Direct I/O is a completely viable solution.  (And I'll add it solves a
bunch of other problems, including page cache efficiency....)

					- Ted


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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux