[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150511072000.GB19488@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 00:20:00 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net>,
Maxim Patlasov <mpatlasov@...allels.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] block: loop: use kthread_work
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 06:32:03PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > I can't really parse this, what's the specific advantage here?
>
> Patch 4's commit log provides the test data.
>
> >From the data, it is observed that one thread is enough to get
> similar throughput with previous one which submits IO from
> work concurrently.
>
> Single thread can decrease context switch a lots, also one thread is
> often used to submit AIO in reality.
But we still need to support the non-AIO case. For one due to
bisectablity, and second even with AIO support we'll still have people
using it.
--
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