- To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Software RAID checksum performance on 24 disks not even close to kernel reported
- From: Ole Tange <ole@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 21:26:34 +0200
- Cc: linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <CABE8wws8u_bOwfv_j1gJicFbrwUQ4M_BFc7bMV2_+fJSkhL=mg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Ole Tange <ole@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:
>>> Don't use CONFIG_MULTICORE_RAID456, we need a different approach.
>>
>> Here you disagree with Brad Campbell and Igor M Podlesny. Can you
>> elaborate why you do not think I should use CONFIG_MULTICORE_RAID456
>> and why you do not think that approach will work?
>
> Because I wrote the code and it doesn't work the way I want it to [...]
It can hardly be more authoritative than this :-)
/Ole
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[ATA RAID]
[Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]
[Managing RAID on Linux]
[Linux IDE]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux Hams]
[Device-Mapper]
[Kernel]
[Linux Books]
[Linux Admin]
[Linux Net]
[GFS]
[RPM]
[git]
[Photos]
[Yosemite Photos]
[Yosemite News]
[AMD 64]
[Linux Networking]