> > OK, so you disagree with Miklos' 2nd point here:
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/4/137
>
> Yup, silly man thought that "congestion_wait" has something to do with
> congestion ;) I think it sort-of used to, once.
Oh well. I _usually_ do actually read the code, but this seemed so
On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 09:01:57 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 16:24 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:42:21 +0200
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > Now that we have per BDI dirty throttling is makes sense to also have oer
> > >
On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 16:24 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:42:21 +0200
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Now that we have per BDI dirty throttling is makes sense to also have oer
> > BDI
> > congestion feedback; why wait on another device if the current one is not
> >
On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 16:24 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:42:21 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that we have per BDI dirty throttling is makes sense to also have oer
BDI
congestion feedback; why wait on another device if the current one is not
congested.
On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 09:01:57 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 16:24 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:42:21 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that we have per BDI dirty throttling is makes sense to also have oer
BDI
congestion
OK, so you disagree with Miklos' 2nd point here:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/4/137
Yup, silly man thought that congestion_wait has something to do with
congestion ;) I think it sort-of used to, once.
Oh well. I _usually_ do actually read the code, but this seemed so
obvious... I'll
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:42:21 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now that we have per BDI dirty throttling is makes sense to also have oer BDI
> congestion feedback; why wait on another device if the current one is not
> congested.
Similar comments apply. congestion_wait() should be called
Now that we have per BDI dirty throttling is makes sense to also have oer BDI
congestion feedback; why wait on another device if the current one is not
congested.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/block/pktcdvd.c |2 -
drivers/md/dm-crypt.c |7 +++--
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:42:21 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that we have per BDI dirty throttling is makes sense to also have oer BDI
congestion feedback; why wait on another device if the current one is not
congested.
Similar comments apply. congestion_wait() should be called
Now that we have per BDI dirty throttling is makes sense to also have oer BDI
congestion feedback; why wait on another device if the current one is not
congested.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
drivers/block/pktcdvd.c |2 -
drivers/md/dm-crypt.c |7 +++--
10 matches
Mail list logo