Re: i/o scheduling (was Re: NEW_BUFQ_STRATEGY)
YAMAMOTO Takashi <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.performance,gmane.os.netbsd.devel.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
hi, > > > I'd like to see this too. IMHO, this can share the same queue as delayed > > > writes. Only wake up the disk when there's too much requests in the queue, or > > > we have something else to do. > > > This would also prevent writes to log files to wake up the disk. > > > > it isn't so easy. > > "delayed writes" can't be delayed so much because e.g. synchronous > > read requests can happen on the delayed-writed page and we have no way > > to look up corresponding buf from a page. > > I don't understand what you mean here. If we have a read request for a > delayed-write page, why would the read end in the disk's queue at all ? > UVM should find the data in memory. please read my replies to tls@. (maybe a term "read request" was not appropriate to use, sorry.) i meant, e.g. getpages will find the page in the cache as you say and then notice the page is marked PG_BUSY and wait on it. YAMAMOTO Takashi