Hi Jaegeuk, Gu, Changman
> -Original Message-
> From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaeg...@kernel.org]
> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2014 1:36 PM
> To: Gu Zheng
> Cc: f2fs; fsdevel; 이창만; 俞
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] f2fs: use find_next_bit_le rather than test_bit_le
> in, find_in_block
>
> Well, how a
Well, how about testing with many ones in the bit streams?
Thanks,
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 06:14:02PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
> Hi Jaegeuk, Changman
>
> Just a simple test, not very sure it can address
> our qualm.
>
> Bitmap size:216(the same as f2fs dentry_bits).
> CPU: Intel i5 x86_64.
>
> Ti
Dear,
Do you have a dream of printing some high-quality products with low cost?
Here Freda comes from a printing company which can print various products, a range from business cards, books to stickers, paper bags, boxes, etc.
Could you tell me which products you are interested in?
We do not need to block on ->node_write among different node page writers e.g.
fsync/flush, unless we have a node page writer from write_checkpoint.
So it's better use rw_semaphore instead of mutex type for ->node_write to
promote performance.
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu
---
fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c |
Hi Jaegeuk, Changman
Just a simple test, not very sure it can address
our qualm.
Bitmap size:216(the same as f2fs dentry_bits).
CPU: Intel i5 x86_64.
Time counting based on tsc(the less the fast).
[Index of 1]find_next_bit_letest_bit_le
0 20 117
1
