> Yeah, it'll confuse CFQ a lot actually. The threads either need to share > an io context (clean approach, however will introduce locking for things > that were previously lockless), or CFQ needs to get better support for > cooperating processes.
Do let me know if I can be of any help in this. > For the fio testing, we can make some improvements there. Right now you > don't get any concurrency of the io requests if you set eg iodepth=32, > as the 32 requests will be submitted as a linked chain of atoms. For io > saturation, that's not really what you want. Just to be clear: I'm currently focusing on supporting sys_io_*() so I'm using fio's libaio engine. I'm not testing the syslet syscall interface yet. - z - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
