On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Ole Tange <ole@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Ole Tange <ole@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:14 AM, Ole Tange <ole@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> But I cannot explain why even the best performance (4600 MB/11s = 420 >>>> MB/s) is not even close to the checksum performance reported by the >>>> kernel at boot (6196 MB/s): >>> >>> From the friendly people on the mailing list the answer can be summarized as: > : >>> In other words: What you see is normal, and it is not out of the >>> ordinary to see md0_raid6 use 100% CPU time on a single core when >>> using a 24 disk RAID6. Work is underway to spread the load to multiple >>> cores using the experimental kernel parameter >>> CONFIG_MULTICORE_RAID456. >> >> Don't use CONFIG_MULTICORE_RAID456, we need a different approach. > > Here you disagree with Brad Campbell and Igor M Podlesny. Can you > elaborate why you do not think I should use CONFIG_MULTICORE_RAID456 > and why you do not think that approach will work? Because I wrote the code and it doesn't work the way I want it to, hence the experimental tag and why I need to go review Shaohua's recent patches. -- Dan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
