linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/2]block: recursive merge requests

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]

Message-ID: <4EEB409B.3070004@kernel.dk>
Date:	Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:59:07 +0100
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
CC:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2]block: recursive merge requests

On 2011-12-16 02:52, Shaohua Li wrote:
> In my workload, thread 1 accesses a, a+2, ..., thread 2 accesses a+1,
> a+3,.... When the requests are flushed to queue, a and a+1 are merged
> to (a, a+1), a+2 and a+3 too to (a+2, a+3), but (a, a+1) and (a+2, a+3)
> aren't merged.
> With recursive merge below, the workload throughput gets improved 20%
> and context switch drops 60%.

Interesting, I didn't consider that corner case. Hard to argue with the
numbers, this might positively impact apps using posix aio for instance.
Applied to for-3.3/core.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/