[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1Xw5xg-00EfRs-CM@intern.SerNet.DE>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 10:10:43 +0100
From: Volker Lendecke <Volker.Lendecke@...Net.DE>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Milosz Tanski <milosz@...in.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-aio@...ck.org" <linux-aio@...ck.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/7] vfs: Non-blockling buffered fs read (page cache
only)
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 02:42:00PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> The question is whether a simpler approach such as fincore() will be
> sufficient.
For many use cases in Samba, fincore will probably be
enough. But Windows clients become more and more
multi-threaded, so Samba sees multiple parallel active read
requests. Samba's core SMB processing engine is single
threaded, and if due to that race we get blocked, more than
one data stream will be affected. We might make it an option
to use the fincore alternative, but I don't see it as a
default. The default will be the strict threadpool.
With best regards,
Volker Lendecke
--
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt@...net.de
--
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