[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFza9mK0=auaRijA397tHZp+kghczYrS9L6j1O6UTnGJyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 16:13:08 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs-writeback: drop wb->list_lock during blk_finish_plug()
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Chris Mason <clm@...com> wrote:
>
> Originally I was worried about the latency impact of holding the
> plugs over more than one super with high end flash. I just didn't want
> to hold onto the IO for longer than we had to.
>
> But, since this isn't really latency sensitive anyway, if we find we're
> not keeping the flash pipelines full the right answer is to short
> circuit the plugging in general. I'd agree actual throughput should be
> the same.
Yeah, this only triggers for system-wide writeback, so I don't seer
that it should be latency-sensitive at that level, afaik.
But hey, it's IO, and I've been surprised by magic pattern
sensitivites before...
Linus
--
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