On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 09:14:55AM +0100, Richard Davies wrote:
> Hi Mel,
>
> Thanks for your latest patch, I attach a perf report below with this on top
> of all previous patches. There is still lock contention, though in a
> different place.
>
> 59.97% qemu-kvm [kernel.kallsyms]
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 09:50:08AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 09/15/2012 11:55 AM, Richard Davies wrote:
> >Hi Rik, Mel and Shaohua,
> >
> >Thank you for your latest patches. I attach my latest perf report for a slow
> >boot with all of these applied.
> >
> >Mel asked for timings of the slow b
On 09/15/2012 11:55 AM, Richard Davies wrote:
Hi Rik, Mel and Shaohua,
Thank you for your latest patches. I attach my latest perf report for a slow
boot with all of these applied.
Mel asked for timings of the slow boots. It's very hard to give anything
useful here! A normal boot would be a minu
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 04:55:24PM +0100, Richard Davies wrote:
> Hi Rik, Mel and Shaohua,
>
> Thank you for your latest patches. I attach my latest perf report for a slow
> boot with all of these applied.
>
Thanks for testing.
> Mel asked for timings of the slow boots. It's very hard to give a
Richard Davies wrote:
> Thank you for your latest patches. I attach my latest perf report for a slow
> boot with all of these applied.
For avoidance of any doubt, there is the combined diff versus 3.6.0-rc5
which I tested:
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
index 38b42e7..090405d
Argh. And of course I send out the version from _before_ the compile test,
instead of the one after! I am not used to caffeine any more and have had
way too much tea...
---8<---
Make the "skip ahead" logic in compaction resistant to compaction
wrapping around to the end of the zone. This can lea
