My test result confirms that it has been fixed. Thanks for your time. 2009/9/24 Chris Mason <chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 08:43:22AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 04:27:57PM +0800, john wrote: >> > After a git bisect, I think this patch may introduce a performance >> > regression(about 15% slower) in postmark benchmark. Sometimes(last a few >> > seconds) in the test, CPU usage is 100% wait but NO IO is performing, it's >> > not IO-wait. This didn't happen for earlier versions. >> > test*environment: >> > hard disk: INTEL X25-E SSD 64G >> > mkfs options: mkfs.btrfs -m single /dev/xxx >> > mount options: -o ssd,nodatasum,nodatacow >> >> Thanks, I'll give this a shot here. > > Looks like Yan Zheng already tracked it down. I've pushed his fix out > to the master branch. > > Thanks, > Chris > > -- Zhang Jingwang National Research Centre for High Performance Computers Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences No. 6, South Kexueyuan Road, Haidian District Beijing, China -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
