linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes

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, 19 Nov 2009 14:29:29 +0100
From:	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
Cc:	David Zeuthen <david@...ar.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	axboe@...nel.dk, linux-hotplug@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle 
	changes

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 14:01, Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:09:30PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 22:33, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> wrote:
>> > My use cases are on the order of a second.
>>
>> Ok, what's the specific use case, which should be triggered after a
>> second? I thought you were thinking about disk spindown or similar.
>
> The first is altering ALPM policy. ALPM will be initiated by the host if
> the number of queued requests hits zero - if there's no hysteresis
> implemented, then that can result in a significant performance hit. We
> don't need /much/ hysteresis, but it's the difference between a 50%
> performance hit and not having that.

Can't that logic live entirely in the kernel, instead of being a
rather generic userspace event interface (with the current limitation
to a single user)?

Kay
--
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/