Yup. I haven't really considered or tested any other strategies
here, but it's part of writer throttling. If we let these processes
skip an inode which is already under writeback and go on to the next
one there is a risk that we end up submitting IO all over the disk.
Or not. I have not tried it.
All those threads would end up throttling in get_request_wait() instead.
Which is a single waitqueue. But it is wake-one.
> The entire summary of results
> of that series of patches was "highmem drops dead under load".
There really is no shame in sending out bugreports, you know.
> But performance benefits from this minor increase in size should be obvious.
>
But they're all waiting on the same inode ;)
-
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/