[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1314364701.12445.0.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 15:18:21 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] writeback: dirty position control
On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 21:13 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> We got similar result as in the read disturber case, even though one
> disturbs N and the other impacts writeout bandwith. The original
> patchset is consistently performing much better :)
It does indeed, and I figure on these timescales it makes sense to
assumes N is a constant. Fair enough, thanks!
--
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