On Thu, Feb 09 2017 at 4:25pm -0500,
Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:34:07AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 07 2017 at 11:58pm -0500,
> > Kent Overstreet wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:39:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > On Mon 2017-02-06 17:
On Thu, 9 Feb 2017, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:34:07AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 07 2017 at 11:58pm -0500,
> > Kent Overstreet wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:39:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > On Mon 2017-02-06 17:49:06, Kent Overs
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:34:07AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07 2017 at 11:58pm -0500,
> Kent Overstreet wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:39:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Mon 2017-02-06 17:49:06, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:47:24PM -0
On Tue, Feb 07 2017 at 11:58pm -0500,
Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:39:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Mon 2017-02-06 17:49:06, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:47:24PM -0900, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:53:09PM +01
On Tue, 2017-02-07 at 19:58 -0900, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:39:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Mon 2017-02-06 17:49:06, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:47:24PM -0900, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:53:09PM +0100, P
On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:39:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2017-02-06 17:49:06, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:47:24PM -0900, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:53:09PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > Still there on v4.9, 36 threads on noki
On Tue, 2017-02-07 at 21:39 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2017-02-06 17:49:06, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:47:24PM -0900, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:53:09PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > Still there on v4.9, 36 threads on nokia n900
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Kent Overstreet
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:47:24PM -0900, Kent Overstreet wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:53:09PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> > Still there on v4.9, 36 threads on nokia n900 cellphone.
>> >
>> > So.. what needs to be done there?
>
>>
On Mon 2017-02-06 17:49:06, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:47:24PM -0900, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:53:09PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Still there on v4.9, 36 threads on nokia n900 cellphone.
> > >
> > > So.. what needs to be done there?
>
>
On Mon, Feb 06 2017 at 9:49pm -0500,
Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:47:24PM -0900, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:53:09PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Still there on v4.9, 36 threads on nokia n900 cellphone.
> > >
> > > So.. what needs to be done
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:47:24PM -0900, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:53:09PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Still there on v4.9, 36 threads on nokia n900 cellphone.
> >
> > So.. what needs to be done there?
> But, I just got an idea for how to handle this that might be ha
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:53:09PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sat 2016-02-20 21:04:32, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > > > > > I know it is normal to spawn 8 threads for every single function,
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > but 28 threads?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > root 974 0.0
On Sat 2016-02-20 21:04:32, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > > > I know it is normal to spawn 8 threads for every single function,
> > > > > ...
> > > > > > but 28 threads?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > root 974 0.0 0.0 0 0 ?S< Dec08 0:00
> > > > > > [bioset]
> > > > >
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 10:48:10AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 22 2016 at 9:55pm -0500,
> > Ming Lei wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Kent Overstreet
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 05:40:59PM +0800, M
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22 2016 at 9:55pm -0500,
> Ming Lei wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Kent Overstreet
>> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 05:40:59PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Ming Lin-SSI
>>
On Mon 2016-02-22 13:58:18, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 05:40:59PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Ming Lin-SSI
> > wrote:
> > >>-Original Message-
> > >
> > > So it's almost already "per request_queue"
> >
> > Yes, that is because of the
On Mon, Feb 22 2016 at 9:55pm -0500,
Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Kent Overstreet
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 05:40:59PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> >> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Ming Lin-SSI
> >> wrote:
> >> >>-Original Message-
> >> >
> >> > So it's
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Kent Overstreet
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 05:40:59PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Ming Lin-SSI wrote:
>> >>-Original Message-
>> >
>> > So it's almost already "per request_queue"
>>
>> Yes, that is because of the follow
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 05:40:59PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Ming Lin-SSI wrote:
> >>-Original Message-
> >
> > So it's almost already "per request_queue"
>
> Yes, that is because of the following line:
>
> q->bio_split = bioset_create(BIO_POOL_SIZE, 0);
>
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Ming Lin-SSI wrote:
>>-Original Message-
>
> So it's almost already "per request_queue"
Yes, that is because of the following line:
q->bio_split = bioset_create(BIO_POOL_SIZE, 0);
in blk_alloc_queue_node().
Looks like this bio_set doesn't need to be per
>-Original Message-
>From: Kent Overstreet [mailto:kent.overstr...@gmail.com]
>
>On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 09:55:19PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> > > > You're directing this concern to the wrong person.
>> > > >
>> > > > I already told you DM is _not_ contributing any extra "biose
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 09:55:19PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > You're directing this concern to the wrong person.
> > > >
> > > > I already told you DM is _not_ contributing any extra "bioset" threads
> > > > (ever since commit dbba42d8a).
> > >
> > > Well, sorry about that. Note
Hi!
> > > You're directing this concern to the wrong person.
> > >
> > > I already told you DM is _not_ contributing any extra "bioset" threads
> > > (ever since commit dbba42d8a).
> >
> > Well, sorry about that. Note that l-k is on the cc list, so hopefully
> > the right person sees it too.
> >
On Sat, Feb 20 2016 at 3:04pm -0500,
Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > > > I know it is normal to spawn 8 threads for every single function,
> > > > > ...
> > > > > > but 28 threads?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > root 974 0.0 0.0 0 0 ?S< Dec08 0:00
> > > > > > [bioset
Hi!
> > > > > I know it is normal to spawn 8 threads for every single function,
> > > > ...
> > > > > but 28 threads?
> > > > >
> > > > > root 974 0.0 0.0 0 0 ?S< Dec08 0:00
> > > > > [bioset]
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > How many physical block devices do you have?
On Sat, Feb 20 2016 at 1:42pm -0500,
Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sat 2016-02-20 18:40:35, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > On Fri 2015-12-11 09:08:41, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 11 2015 at 5:49am -0500,
> > > Pavel Machek wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > I know it is normal to sp
On Sat 2016-02-20 18:40:35, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> On Fri 2015-12-11 09:08:41, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 11 2015 at 5:49am -0500,
> > Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > I know it is normal to spawn 8 threads for every single function,
> > ...
> > > but 28 threads?
> > >
On Fri 2015-12-11 09:08:41, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11 2015 at 5:49am -0500,
> Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > I know it is normal to spawn 8 threads for every single function,
> ...
> > but 28 threads?
> >
> > root 974 0.0 0.0 0 0 ?S< Dec08 0:00 [
28 matches
Mail list logo