On 09/01/2016 11:06 PM, Eric Wheeler wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Mark Brown wrote:
> [...]
>> I personally feel that given that it looks like this is all going to
>> take a while it'd still be good to merge BFQ at least as an alternative
>> scheduler so that people can take advantage of it while
On 09/01/2016 11:06 PM, Eric Wheeler wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Mark Brown wrote:
> [...]
>> I personally feel that given that it looks like this is all going to
>> take a while it'd still be good to merge BFQ at least as an alternative
>> scheduler so that people can take advantage of it while
On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
wrote:
> I did this (switched MMC to blk-mq) some time ago. Patches are
> extremely ugly and hacky (basically the whole MMC block layer
> glue code needs to be re-done) so I'm rather reluctant to
> sharing them
On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
wrote:
> I did this (switched MMC to blk-mq) some time ago. Patches are
> extremely ugly and hacky (basically the whole MMC block layer
> glue code needs to be re-done) so I'm rather reluctant to
> sharing them yet (to be honest I would
Il giorno 05/set/2016, alle ore 17:56, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
ha scritto:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday, September 01, 2016 10:39:46 AM Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>>> - Do some benchmarks on the
Il giorno 05/set/2016, alle ore 17:56, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
ha scritto:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday, September 01, 2016 10:39:46 AM Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>>> - Do some benchmarks on the current status of the various branches on
>>>
Hi,
On Thursday, September 01, 2016 10:39:46 AM Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > - Do some benchmarks on the current status of the various branches on
> >relevant hardware (including trying to convert some of these slower
Hi,
On Thursday, September 01, 2016 10:39:46 AM Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > - Do some benchmarks on the current status of the various branches on
> >relevant hardware (including trying to convert some of these slower
> >devices to
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Mark Brown wrote:
[...]
> I personally feel that given that it looks like this is all going to
> take a while it'd still be good to merge BFQ at least as an alternative
> scheduler so that people can take advantage of it while the work on
> modernising everything to use blk-mq
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Mark Brown wrote:
[...]
> I personally feel that given that it looks like this is all going to
> take a while it'd still be good to merge BFQ at least as an alternative
> scheduler so that people can take advantage of it while the work on
> modernising everything to use blk-mq
On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> - Do some benchmarks on the current status of the various branches on
>relevant hardware (including trying to convert some of these slower
>devices to blk-mq and seeing what happens). Linus has been working
>
On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> - Do some benchmarks on the current status of the various branches on
>relevant hardware (including trying to convert some of these slower
>devices to blk-mq and seeing what happens). Linus has been working
>on this already in
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 06:19:54AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> please don't spend more time on the legacy request interface. If you
> want your work included and make an impact add it to blk-mq.
So, an update on this: off-list Tejun said that he'd spoken with Jens
and agreed that nothing
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 06:19:54AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> please don't spend more time on the legacy request interface. If you
> want your work included and make an impact add it to blk-mq.
So, an update on this: off-list Tejun said that he'd spoken with Jens
and agreed that nothing
Il 08/08/2016 15:19, Christoph Hellwig ha scritto:
Again,
please don't spend more time on the legacy request interface. If you
want your work included and make an impact add it to blk-mq.
Working on that front too (and about to send a RFD in this respect).
Thanks,
Paolo
Il 08/08/2016 15:19, Christoph Hellwig ha scritto:
Again,
please don't spend more time on the legacy request interface. If you
want your work included and make an impact add it to blk-mq.
Working on that front too (and about to send a RFD in this respect).
Thanks,
Paolo
Again,
please don't spend more time on the legacy request interface. If you
want your work included and make an impact add it to blk-mq.
Again,
please don't spend more time on the legacy request interface. If you
want your work included and make an impact add it to blk-mq.
[This patchset, based against v4.8-rc1, replaces my last-submitted
series, wrongly tagged as V8]
Hi,
this new version of the patchset contains the improvements and bug
fixes recommended by Tejun [7], plus new features of BFQ-v8r2. Details
about old and new features in patch descriptions. For your
[This patchset, based against v4.8-rc1, replaces my last-submitted
series, wrongly tagged as V8]
Hi,
this new version of the patchset contains the improvements and bug
fixes recommended by Tejun [7], plus new features of BFQ-v8r2. Details
about old and new features in patch descriptions. For your
20 matches
Mail list logo