| To: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Re: mysterious dbench results] |
| From: | Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 21 Feb 2001 15:07:03 +0100 |
| Cc: | Chaitanya Tumuluri <chait@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Graichen <graichen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rajagopal Ananthanarayanan <ananth@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20010221104522.A10722@gruyere.muc.suse.de>; from ak@suse.de on Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 10:45:22AM +0100 |
| References: | <20010221013939.G1447@suse.de> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102201646400.6815-100000@getafix.engr.sgi.com> <20010221022700.H1447@suse.de> <20010221104522.A10722@gruyere.muc.suse.de> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, Feb 21 2001, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Ooooh! kiobuf-sized buffer-head requests are now allowed? Cool! :^) > > > > They can grow arbitrarily big, only limited by limitations of the > > low level driver. But the reason max_segments is gone is because > > Just there seem to be lots of drivers that cannot deal with big requests. This is only a problem for the kiobufs, the buffer_head requests can be limited to whatever the driver wants. -- Jens Axboe |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Fwd: Re: mysterious dbench results], Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Pagebuf Buf: Don't Call 'buffer_IO_error()', Danny |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Fwd: Re: mysterious dbench results], Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | XFS and SW RAID, Kalvinder Singh |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |