[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110421010132.GE1814@dastard>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:01:32 +1000
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
Itaru Kitayama <kitayama@...bb4u.ne.jp>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] writeback: sync expired inodes first in background
writeback
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 03:38:22PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > make. Please test against a vanilla kernel if that is what you are
> > aiming these patches for. If you aren't aiming for a vanilla kernel,
> > please say so in the patch series header...
>
> Here are the test results for vanilla kernel. It's again shows better
> numbers for dd, tar and overall run time.
>
> 2.6.39-rc3 2.6.39-rc3-dyn-expire+
> ------------------------------------------------
> all elapsed 256.043 252.367
> stddev 24.381 12.530
>
> tar elapsed 30.097 28.808
> dd elapsed 13.214 11.782
The big reduction in run-to-run variance is very convincing - moreso
than the reduction in runtime - That's kind of what I had hoped
would occur once I understood the implications of the change. Thanks
for running the test to close the loop. :)
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
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