Hi,
I ran some really trivial raw disk performance tests on 2.4.0 using
the raw disk support in it. I seem to be getting some really strange
performance results. My program opens up a raw device, then does
a sequence of sequential/random reads/writes on the raw device using
pread/pwrite. I put
Hi,
I ran some really trivial raw disk performance tests on 2.4.0 using
the raw disk support in it. I seem to be getting some really strange
performance results. My program opens up a raw device, then does
a sequence of sequential/random reads/writes on the raw device using
pread/pwrite. I put
Hi,
I think I forgot to include the subject on the email I sent last time.
Not sure how many people saw it. I'm trying to send this message again...
I have two questions on Linux pthread related issues. Would anyone be able
to help?
1. Does any one have some suggestions (pointers) on good
Hi,
I think I forgot to include the subject on the email I sent last time.
Not sure how many people saw it. I'm trying to send this message again...
I have two questions on Linux pthread related issues. Would anyone be able
to help?
1. Does any one have some suggestions (pointers) on good
Hi,
I have two questions on Linux pthread related issues. Would anyone be able
to help?
1. Does any one have some suggestions (pointers) on good kernel Linux thread
libraries?
2. We ran multi-threaded application using Linux pthread library on 2-way
SMP and UP intel platforms (with both 2.2
Hi,
I have two questions on Linux pthread related issues. Would anyone be able
to help?
1. Does any one have some suggestions (pointers) on good kernel Linux thread
libraries?
2. We ran multi-threaded application using Linux pthread library on 2-way
SMP and UP intel platforms (with both 2.2
ler, void
*private)
======
Ying Chen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
)
==
Ying Chen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Neil,
Here is a set of fixes and answers to you questions/points. The new patch
was tested in my own environment again and worked fine.
1/ Why did you change nfsd_busy into an atomic_t? It is only ever
used or updated inside the Big-Kernel-Lock, so it doesn't need
to be atomic.
I
Neil,
Here is a set of fixes and answers to you questions/points. The new patch
was tested in my own environment again and worked fine.
1/ Why did you change nfsd_busy into an atomic_t? It is only ever
used or updated inside the Big-Kernel-Lock, so it doesn't need
to be atomic.
I
list_del(>p_lru);
+ list_add(>p_lru, _head);
+ nfsdstats.ra_hits++;
+ goto found;
+ }
+}
+
+/* Did not find one. Get a new item and insert it into the hash table. */
+ra = nfsd_racache_insert(ino, dev);
+nfsdstats.ra_misses++;
+found:
+spin_unlock(_lock);
+return ra;
+}
Ying Chen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
ra = nfsd_racache_insert(ino, dev);
+ nfsdstats.ra_misses++;
+found:
+spin_unlock(racache_lock);
+return ra;
+}
Ying Chen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Hi,
I'm wondering if someone can tell me why sync_all_inodes() is called in
prune_icache().
sync_all_inodes() can cause problems in some situations when memory is
short and shrink_icache_memory() is called.
For instance, when the system is really short of memory,
do_try_to_free_pages() is
in scanning the table (even
though the table is small), the hash table-based is much more effective
and fast. I have generated the patch for test10 and tested it.
(See attached file: a)
Ying Chen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IBM Almaden Research Center
a
in scanning the table (even
though the table is small), the hash table-based is much more effective
and fast. I have generated the patch for test10 and tested it.
(See attached file: a)
Ying Chen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IBM Almaden Research Center
a
Hi,
I made some optimizations on racache in nfsd in test10. The idea is to
replace with existing fixed length table for readahead cache in NFSD with a
hash table.
The old racache is essentially ineffective in dealing with large # of
files, and yet eats CPU cycles in scanning the table (even
Hi,
I made some optimizations on racache in nfsd in test10. The idea is to
replace with existing fixed length table for readahead cache in NFSD with a
hash table.
The old racache is essentially ineffective in dealing with large # of
files, and yet eats CPU cycles in scanning the table (even
I'd second that this is most likely a VM related problem. Last few days I
sent you an example that I would make system hang simply by
doing a mkfs on 90 GB file system. This happens when low 1GB memory is used
up (but I still have high 1GB available). I think
David probably ran into the same
I'd second that this is most likely a VM related problem. Last few days I
sent you an example that I would make system hang simply by
doing a mkfs on 90 GB file system. This happens when low 1GB memory is used
up (but I still have high 1GB available). I think
David probably ran into the same
19 matches
Mail list logo
