On 08/21, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > The other consideration is that this adds two branches to the normal > schedule path. I really don't know what the regular ratio between > schedule() and io_schedule() is -- and I suspect it can very much depend > on workload -- but it might be a net loss due to that, even if it makes > io_schedule() 'lots' cheaper.
Yes, agreed. Please ignore it for now, I didn't try to actually suggest this change. And even if this is fine perfomance wise, this needs some benchmarking. Well. actually I have a vague feeling that _perhaps_ this change can help to solve other problems we are discussing, but I am not sure and right now I can't even explain the idea to me. In short: please ignore ;) Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/