[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130121231130.GB12410@thunk.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:11:30 -0500
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, mszeredi@...e.cz
Subject: Re: jbd2: don't wake kjournald unnecessarily
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:04:32AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>
> Beyond the FUSE/LOOP fun, will you apply this patch to your linux-next GIT tree?
>
> Feel free to add...
>
> Tested-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
>
> A similiar patch for JBD went through your tree into mainline (see [1] and [2]).
I'm not at all convinced that this patch has anything to do with your
problem. I don't see how it could affect things, and I believe you
mentioned that you saw the problem even with this patch applied? (I'm
not sure; some of your messages which you sent were hard to
understand, and you mentioned something about trying to send messages
when low on sleep :-).
In any case, the reason why I haven't pulled this patch into the ext4
tree is because I was waiting for Eric and some of the performance
team folks at Red Hat to supply some additional information about why
this commit was making a difference in performance for a particular
proprietary, closed source benchmark.
I'm very suspicious about applying patches under the "cargo cult"
school of programming. ("We don't understand why it makes a
difference, but it seems to be good, so bombs away!" :-)
Regards,
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists