[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1246418733.2560.468.camel@ymzhang>
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 11:25:33 +0800
From: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Ying Han <yinghan@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: fio sync read 4k block size 35% regression
Comapraing with 2.6.30, fio sync read (block size 4k) has about 35% regression
with kernel 2.6.31-rc1 on my stoakley machine with a JBOD (13 SCSI disks).
Every disk has 1 partition and 4 1-GB files. Start 10 processes per disk to
do sync read sequentinally.
Bisected down to below patch.
51daa88ebd8e0d437289f589af29d4b39379ea76 is first bad commit
commit 51daa88ebd8e0d437289f589af29d4b39379ea76
Author: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Date: Tue Jun 16 15:31:24 2009 -0700
readahead: remove sync/async readahead call dependency
The readahead call scheme is error-prone in that it expects the call sites
to check for async readahead after doing a sync one. I.e.
if (!page)
page_cache_sync_readahead();
page = find_get_page();
if (page && PageReadahead(page))
page_cache_async_readahead();
I also test block size 64k and 128k, but they don't have regression. Perhaps
the default read_ahead_kb is equal to 128?
Other 2 machines have no such regression. The JBODS of the 2 machines consists
of 12 and 7 SATA/SAS disks while every disk has 2 partitions.
--
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