On 05/04/2015 02:33 PM, Shaohua Li wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 01:46:49PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 05/04/2015 01:40 PM, Shaohua Li wrote:
On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 04:16:04PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Shaohua Li writes:
plug is still helpful for workload with IO merge, but it can be harm
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 01:46:49PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/04/2015 01:40 PM, Shaohua Li wrote:
> >On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 04:16:04PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> >>Shaohua Li writes:
> >>
> >>>plug is still helpful for workload with IO merge, but it can be harmful
> >>>otherwise especially
On 05/04/2015 01:40 PM, Shaohua Li wrote:
On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 04:16:04PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Shaohua Li writes:
plug is still helpful for workload with IO merge, but it can be harmful
otherwise especially with multiple hardware queues, as there is
(supposed) no lock contention in thi
old_rq = rq;
> > + blk_mq_put_ctx(data.ctx);
> > + if (!old_rq)
> > + return;
> > + if (!blk_mq_direct_issue_request(old_rq))
> > + return;
> > + blk_mq_insert_request(old_rq, false, true,
Shaohua Li writes:
> plug is still helpful for workload with IO merge, but it can be harmful
> otherwise especially with multiple hardware queues, as there is
> (supposed) no lock contention in this case and plug can introduce
> latency. For multiple queues, we do limited plug, eg plug only if th
plug is still helpful for workload with IO merge, but it can be harmful
otherwise especially with multiple hardware queues, as there is
(supposed) no lock contention in this case and plug can introduce
latency. For multiple queues, we do limited plug, eg plug only if there
is request merge. If a re
6 matches
Mail list logo
