Re: [RFC] relaxed barrier semantics

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

 



On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:00:25AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:58:30AM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > I see.  It probably would be good to have ordering requirements
> > carried in the bio / request, so that filesystems can mix and match
> > barriers of different strengths as necesasry.  As you seem to be
> > already working on it, are you interested in pursuing that direction?
> 
> I've been working on that for a while, but it got a lot more urgent
> as there's been an application hit particularly hard by the barrier
> semantics on cache less devices and people started getting angry
> about it.  That's why fixing this for cache less devices has become
> a higher priority than solving the big picture.

And in the process IO controller cgroup stuff will also benefit otherwise
excessive draining on request queue takes away any service differentiation
CFQ provides among groups.

Vivek
--
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