On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > No difference (except more context switching as expected) > > What about the current prerelese patch in testing? It doesn't switch to > bdflush at all, but instead does the buffer cleaning by hand. 99% gone. The remaining 1% is refill_freelist(). If I use flush_dirty_buffers() there instead of waiting, I have no more semaphore timeouts (so far.. not thoroughly pounded upon). Without that change, I still take hits. (in my tinker tree, I usually make a 'small flush' mode for flush_dirty_buffers() to do that) Feel is _vastly_ improved. -Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: scheduling problem? Anton Blanchard
- Re: scheduling problem? Mike Galbraith
- Re: scheduling problem? Linus Torvalds
- Re: scheduling problem? Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: scheduling problem? Linus Torvalds
- Re: scheduling problem? Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: scheduling problem? Linus Torvalds
- Re: scheduling problem? Linus Torvalds
- Re: scheduling problem? Mike Galbraith
- Re: scheduling problem? Linus Torvalds
- Re: scheduling problem? Mike Galbraith
- Re: scheduling problem? Mike Galbraith
- Re: scheduling problem? Daniel Phillips
- Re: scheduling problem? Mike Galbraith
- Re: scheduling problem? Daniel Phillips
- Re: scheduling problem? Mike Galbraith
- Re: scheduling problem? Daniel Phillips
- Re: scheduling problem? Mike Galbraith
- Re: scheduling problem? Daniel Phillips
- Re: scheduling problem? Roger Larsson
- Re: scheduling problem? Mike Galbraith