[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B4B0AA9.5020900@garzik.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 06:25:29 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@...il.com>
CC: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfq-iosched: NCQ SSDs do not need read queue merging
On 01/10/2010 04:04 PM, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> NCQ SSDs' performances are not affected by
> distance of read requests, so there is no point in having
> overhead to merge such queues.
>
> Non-NCQ SSDs showed regression in some special cases, so
> they are ruled out by this patch.
>
> This patch intentionally doesn't affect writes, so
> it changes the queued[] field, to be indexed by
> READ/WRITE instead of SYNC/ASYNC, and only compute proximity
> for queues with WRITE requests.
>
> Signed-off-by: Corrado Zoccolo<czoccolo@...il.com>
That's not really true. Overhead always increases as the total number
of ATA commands issued increases.
Jeff
--
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