Re: [Fwd: Re: mysterious dbench results]

[Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Feb 20 2001, Chaitanya Tumuluri wrote:
> True. So, how about trying out the following patch which is a
> first cut at inserting the kiobuf requests in  LBA-ordered 
> fashion in the elevator?
> 
> At the very least, it reduces the seek times which might've been
> affecting kiobuf I/O performance adversely.

You just further extend what I really don't like about the
current approach to kiobuf I/O ;-). It's on huge clamp-on
to ll_rw_blk...

How about something that doesn't do merges on kiobufs, but
just searches for an insertion point exactly like a buffer_head
would do? And please don't make elevator_merge_fn even bigger
than it already is, within limits of course. BTW, the max_segments
is gone from the current tree.

-- 
Jens Axboe