linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/19] Hardware Accelerated MD RAID5: Introduction

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20060913071512.GA23492@unthought.net>
Date:	Wed, 13 Sep 2006 09:15:12 +0200
From:	Jakob Oestergaard <jakob@...hought.net>
To:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:	NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	christopher.leech@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/19] Hardware Accelerated MD RAID5: Introduction

On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 04:00:32PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Neil,
> 
...
> 
> Concerning the context switching performance concerns raised at the
> previous release, I have observed the following.  For the hardware
> accelerated case it appears that performance is always better with the
> work queue than without since it allows multiple stripes to be operated
> on simultaneously.  I expect the same for an SMP platform, but so far my
> testing has been limited to IOPs.  For a single-processor
> non-accelerated configuration I have not observed performance
> degradation with work queue support enabled, but in the Kconfig option
> help text I recommend disabling it (CONFIG_MD_RAID456_WORKQUEUE).

Out of curiosity; how does accelerated compare to non-accelerated?

-- 

 / jakob

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/