On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 10:36 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Friday 02 June 2006 04:43, Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 14:04 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > > > - disk I/O bandwidth:
> > > > we started to use CFQv2, but it is quite poor in this regard. First, it
> > > > doesn't prioritizes writes and async disk operations :( And even for
> > > > sync reads we found some problems we work on now...
> >
> > CKRM (on e-series) had an implementation based on a modified CFQ
> > scheduler. Shailabh is currently working on porting that controller to
> > f-series.
>
> I hope that the changes you have to improve CFQ were done in a way that is
> suitable for mainline and you're planning to try and merge them there.
That is our #1 object :)
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose....
- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ckrm-tech mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
