On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 06:19:10PM +0200, Octavian Purdila wrote: > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Seth Forshee > > And for the second: > > > > stress-ng --class filesystem --seq 0 -v -t 60 > > > > There really wasn't anything interesting in the lklfuse output for the > > first run, but for the second run I pasted the output here: > > http://paste.ubuntu.com/13346993/ > > lklfuse allocates a fixed 100MB to the kernel and this is probably not > enough. For the short term I can add a parameter to lklfuse that > allows the user to specify the amount of memory to allocate to lkl. A > better fix would probably be to dynamically adjust the memory size of > lkl. I am thinking of using the ballon virtio driver or the memory > hotplug infrastructure. Any other suggestions? Hi Octavian, Like Seth said this was very nice to install and run. But I think I'm doing something wrong. I cloned the lkl/linux git tree into a 9G ext4 loopback file, both one mounted with lkl and one mounted as loopback. The results were worse than I expected - loopback was 0m10.078s for clone and 0m0.877s for rm -rf; lkl was 5m5.625s for clone and 0m44.332s for rm -rf. I assume this has to do with the 100MB buffer and subsequent thrashing? How should I tune this to make it perform better? No crashes from this, though. thanks, -serge -- 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
