Re: [RFC] relaxed barrier semantics

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

 



Christoph Hellwig, on 07/30/2010 05:34 PM wrote:
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 05:25:52PM +0400, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
Sure. It was only a naive example to illustrate my points. But the FS is
still waiting for the requests, so "draining" its "local queue"?

Yes, just a much smaller queue in general.

To present a typical case, fsync() on a regular file that has a few
dirty pages on it using XFS.

We use filemap_write_and_wait to write out those few pages and wait
for it.  And after that we only need to issue a SYNCHRONIZE_CACHE
and we'd be done.  Right now the draining semantics of the (empty)
barrier means we also need to wait for all other I/O in the system
to finish, which is rather suboptimal.

Yes, but why not to make step further and allow to completely eliminate the waiting/draining using ORDERED requests? Current advanced storage hardware allows that.

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


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux