xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Performance regression between 2.6.32 and 2.6.38

To: Paul Saab <ps@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Performance regression between 2.6.32 and 2.6.38
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:26:08 -0400
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Joshua Aune <luken@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <CA90F616.8E617%ps@xxxxxx>
References: <20110910060522.GA26968@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CA90F616.8E617%ps@xxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 06:10:50PM +0000, Paul Saab wrote:
> On 9/9/11 11:05 PM, "Christoph Hellwig" <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 06:23:54PM -0600, Joshua Aune wrote:
> >> Are there any mount options or other tests that can be run in the
> >>failing configuration that would be helpful to isolate this further?
> >
> >The best thing would be to bisect it down to at least a kernel release,
> >and if possible to a -rc or individual change (the latter might start
> >to get hard due to various instabilities in early -rc kernels)
> 
> 487f84f3 is where the regression was introduced.

The patch below which is in the queue for Linux 3.2 should fix this
issue, and in fact improve behaviour even further.


Attachment: xfs-dio-read-fix.diff
Description: Text document

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>