On Tue 10-04-07 19:27:22, Andrew Morton wrote:
> And shouldn't offset be called prev_offset? Or should prev_page be called
> page? Or index? Or prev_index? Or Marmaduke? The naming is all a mess.
>
> Wanna take a look at all of this, please?
OK, attached is a patch which changes prev_page
On Tue 10-04-07 19:27:22, Andrew Morton wrote:
And shouldn't offset be called prev_offset? Or should prev_page be called
page? Or index? Or prev_index? Or Marmaduke? The naming is all a mess.
Wanna take a look at all of this, please?
OK, attached is a patch which changes prev_page to
On Tue 10-04-07 19:27:22, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 17:54:11 +0200 Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Introduce ra.offset and store in it an offset where the previous read
> > ended. This way
> > we can detect whether reads are really sequential (and thus we should not
>
> adaptive readahead? Has been in -mm for a year. Problem is, it is
> _so_ complete that I just don't know how to merge it. It's huge, and
> only Wu understands it. So it's really rather stuck.
No benchmark numbers for/against it at all?
-Andi
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
adaptive readahead? Has been in -mm for a year. Problem is, it is
_so_ complete that I just don't know how to merge it. It's huge, and
only Wu understands it. So it's really rather stuck.
No benchmark numbers for/against it at all?
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Tue 10-04-07 19:27:22, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 17:54:11 +0200 Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Introduce ra.offset and store in it an offset where the previous read
ended. This way
we can detect whether reads are really sequential (and thus we should not
mark the
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 04:45:40PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On 11 Apr 2007 00:56:51 +0200
> Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > There's a much more complete patchkit for this that gets reposted
> > regularly on l-k. Perhaps it would make sense to test that first?
>
> adaptive
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 17:54:11 +0200 Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Introduce ra.offset and store in it an offset where the previous read ended.
> This way
> we can detect whether reads are really sequential (and thus we should not
> mark the page
> as accessed repeatedly) or whether they
On 11 Apr 2007 00:56:51 +0200
Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > In thread http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/9/403, we discussed a problem
> > with the current heuristic for detecting sequential IO in
> > do_generic_mapping_read() -
Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello!
>
> In thread http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/9/403, we discussed a problem
> with the current heuristic for detecting sequential IO in
> do_generic_mapping_read() - for small files a page is marked as accessed
> only once which can cause a
Hello!
In thread http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/9/403, we discussed a problem
with the current heuristic for detecting sequential IO in
do_generic_mapping_read() - for small files a page is marked as accessed
only once which can cause a performance problems.
Attached is a patch that improves
Hello!
In thread http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/9/403, we discussed a problem
with the current heuristic for detecting sequential IO in
do_generic_mapping_read() - for small files a page is marked as accessed
only once which can cause a performance problems.
Attached is a patch that improves
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello!
In thread http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/9/403, we discussed a problem
with the current heuristic for detecting sequential IO in
do_generic_mapping_read() - for small files a page is marked as accessed
only once which can cause a performance
On 11 Apr 2007 00:56:51 +0200
Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello!
In thread http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/9/403, we discussed a problem
with the current heuristic for detecting sequential IO in
do_generic_mapping_read() - for small files a
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 17:54:11 +0200 Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Introduce ra.offset and store in it an offset where the previous read ended.
This way
we can detect whether reads are really sequential (and thus we should not
mark the page
as accessed repeatedly) or whether they are
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 04:45:40PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On 11 Apr 2007 00:56:51 +0200
Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's a much more complete patchkit for this that gets reposted
regularly on l-k. Perhaps it would make sense to test that first?
adaptive readahead? Has
16 matches
Mail list logo
