Also, there is a lot of flexibility in how often interrupts are sent
to mark the buffer_heads up-to-date. (With the requests pulled
straight off the queue, the job of end_that_request_first() in doing
the linked list updates and bh->b_end_io() callbacks would be done by
the interrupt routine directly.) At one extreme, I could take an
interrupt for each 4K block issued and mark it up-to-date very
quickly making for very low-latency I/O but a very large interrupt
rate when I/O throughput is high. The alternative would be to arrange
for an interrupt every n buffer_heads (or based on some other
criterion) and only take an interrupt and mark buffers up-to-date on
each of those). Are there any rules of thumb on which is best or
doesn't it matter too much?
--Malcolm
-- Malcolm Beattie <mbeattie@sable.ox.ac.uk> Unix Systems Programmer Oxford University Computing Services - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/