RE: [PATCH V2 RESEND] fsl-sata: I/O load balancing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt [mailto:benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 11:18 AM
> To: Liu Qiang-B32616
> Cc: jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx; linux-ide@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-
> dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [PATCH V2 RESEND] fsl-sata: I/O load balancing
> On Fri, 2012-02-17 at 01:54 +0000, Liu Qiang-B32616 wrote:
> > The default will be set in a common interface
> > fsl_sata_set_irq_coalescing when initialize the controller. This
> > interface will check the range of intr count and ticks and make sure
> the values are reasonably.
> Allright, but the current defaults are basically no coalescing right ?
> > It's hard to find a aggressive value to adapt all scenarios, so I use
> > echo to adjust the value. I remember P5020 have some performance issue,
> I will check it.
> > BTW, which filesystem do you use? Ext2 is lower than ext4 because
> > metadata is continuously wrote to disk. You can try ext4 or xfs.
> ext3 at the moment, I plan to switch to ext4 when I finish that fsck pass
> which is taking hours... I am not aware of the 5020 performance issues,
> is this something documented and/or fixable ?

My patch may not meet your requirement:(
For your performance requirement, I suggest use ext4 filesystem and SSD.


> Cheers,
> Ben.

��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��'^�)��jg��������ݢj����G�������j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥

[Linux Filesystems]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux RAID]     [Git]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Newbie]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux