47.94+1.1%48.45 TOTAL write_bw
In summary, I see no problem at all in these trivial writeback tests.
Tested-by: Wu Fengguang fengguang...@intel.com
Thanks,
Fengguang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message
Hi Johannes,
I tested this patchset over the IO-less dirty throttling one.
The below numbers show that
//improvements
1) write bandwidth increased by 1% in general
2) greatly reduced nr_vmscan_immediate_reclaim
//regression
3) much increased cpu %user and %system for btrfs
Thanks,
Fengguang
[restore CC list]
I'm trying to understand where the performance gain comes from.
I noticed that in all cases, before/after patchset, nr_vmscan_write are all
zero.
nr_vmscan_immediate_reclaim is significantly reduced though:
That's a good thing, it means we burn less CPU time on
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 01:44:57PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 12:41 +0800, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 08:10:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:21:49 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com
wrote:
It seems to return a
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 02:37:37PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 14:19 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 02:12:33PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 13:55 +0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:38:18 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:55:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:13:53PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:27:33AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 11:07 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li
Shaohua,
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
Hi,
We have file readahead to do asyn file read, but has no metadata
readahead. For a list of files, their metadata is stored in fragmented
disk space and metadata read is a sync operation, which impacts the
efficiency
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:03:16AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 09:38 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:15:19AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 22:26 +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:
Shaohua,
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 01:40:30PM
...@shutemov.name
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang fengguang...@intel.com
---
Andrew and Greg:
This is an obvious correct bug fix for .34 and .33-stable,
so I'm resending it directly to you without Kirill's confirmation.
--- sound-2.6.orig/mm/readahead.c 2010-03-26 11:51:57.0 +0800
+++ sound-2.6
, would you please fix this.
Ah Sorry! Here is the patch.
Andrew and Greg: this should go for .34 and .33-stable after Kirill's
confirmation, thanks!
Thanks,
Fengguang
---
Subject: readahead: fix NULL filp dereference
From: Wu Fengguang fengguang...@intel.com
Date: Fri Mar 26 11:53:32 CST 2010
On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:55:18PM +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
Hi
Hi,
This lockdep warning appears when doing stress memory tests over NFS.
page reclaim = nfs_writepage = tcp_sendmsg = lock sk_lock
tcp_close = lock sk_lock = tcp_send_fin = alloc_skb_fclone = page
reclaim
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 04:16:16PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 10:37:39AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
[snip]
PagePrivate is very common. try_to_releasepage failing on a clean page
without the writeback bit set and without dirty/locked buffers will be
pretty rare
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 07:40:22PM +0800, Chris Mason wrote:
On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 16:21 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 04:16:16PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 10:37:39AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
[snip]
PagePrivate is very common
13 matches
Mail list logo
