Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:09:09 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Processes stuck on D state on Dual Opteron |
| |
Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12 2005, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>Actually the patches I have sent you do fix real bugs, but they also >>make the block layer less likely to recurse into page reclaim, so it >>may be eg. hiding the problem that Neil's patch fixes. > > > Jens Axboe wrote on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:08 AM > >>Can you push those to Andrew? I'm quite happy with the way they turned >>out. It would be nice if Ken would bench 2.6.12-rc2 with and without >>those patches. > > > > I like the patch a lot and already did bench it on our db setup. However, > I'm seeing a negative regression compare to a very very crappy patch (see > attached, you can laugh at me for doing things like that :-). >
OK - if we go that way, perhaps the following patch may be the way to do it.
> My first reaction is that the overhead is in wait queue setup and tear down > in get_request_wait function. Throwing the following patch on top does improve > things a bit, but we are still in the negative territory. I can't explain why. > Everything suppose to be faster. So I'm staring at the execution profile at > the moment. >
Hmm, that's a bit disappointing. Like you said though, I'm sure we should be able to get better performance out of this.
I'll look at it and see if we can rework it.
-- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |