[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e2e108260801310634n21473909o5abac021cc889de3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:34:17 +0100
From: "Bart Van Assche" <bart.vanassche@...il.com>
To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
Cc: "FUJITA Tomonori" <tomof@....org>, fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp,
rdreier@...co.com, James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
vst@...b.net, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel
On Jan 31, 2008 2:25 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger <nab@...ux-iscsi.org> wrote:
> Since this particular code is located in a non-data path critical
> section, the kernel vs. user discussion is a wash. If we are talking
> about data path, yes, the relevance of DD tests in kernel designs are
> suspect :p. For those IB testers who are interested, perhaps having a
> look with disktest from the Linux Test Project would give a better
> comparision between the two implementations on a RDMA capable fabric
> like IB for best case performance. I think everyone is interested in
> seeing just how much data path overhead exists between userspace and
> kernel space in typical and heavy workloads, if if this overhead can be
> minimized to make userspace a better option for some of this very
> complex code.
I can run disktest on the same setups I ran dd on. This will take some
time however.
Disktest is new to me -- any hints with regard to suitable
combinations of command line parameters are welcome. The most recent
version I could find on http://ltp.sourceforge.net/ is ltp-20071231.
Bart Van Assche.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists