linux-kernel - RE: [Scst-devel] [Iscsitarget-devel] ISCSI-SCST performance (with also IET and STGT data)

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]

Date:	Thu, 2 Apr 2009 10:14:45 -0400
From:	"Ross S. W. Walker" <RWalker@...allion.com>
To:	"Vladislav Bolkhovitin" <vst@...b.net>,
	"James Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:	<linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"iSCSI Enterprise Target Developer List" 
	<iscsitarget-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Ross Walker" <rswwalker@...il.com>,
	"scst-devel" <scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	<stgt@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [Scst-devel] [Iscsitarget-devel] ISCSI-SCST	performance (with also IET and STGT data)

Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
> > Vladislav Bolkhovitin, on 04/02/2009 11:38 AM wrote:
> > > James Bottomley, on 04/02/2009 12:23 AM wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> SCST explicitly fiddles with the io context to get this to happen.  It
> > >> has a hack to block to export alloc_io_context:
> > >>
> > >> http://marc.info/?t=122893564800003
> > > 
> > > Correct, although I wouldn't call it "fiddle", rather "grouping" ;)
> 
> Call it what you like,
> 
> Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
> > Ross S. W. Walker, on 03/30/2009 10:33 PM wrote:
> > 
> > I would be interested in knowing how your code defeats CFQ's extremely
> > high latency? Does your code reach into the io scheduler too? If not,
> > some code hints would be great.
> 

The above quoting was wrong, for accuracy, it should have read:

Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
> Ross S. W. Walker, on 03/30/2009 10:33 PM wrote:
> > 
> > I would be interested in knowing how your code defeats CFQ's extremely
> > high latency? Does your code reach into the io scheduler too? If not,
> > some code hints would be great.
> 
> Hmm, CFQ doesn't have any extra processing latency, especially 
> "extremely", hence there is nothing to defeat. If it had, how could it 
> been chosen as the default?

Just so there is no misunderstanding who said what here.

-Ross

______________________________________________________________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

--
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/