Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758681AbYAaOed (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:34:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753904AbYAaOeY (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:34:24 -0500 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.234]:63557 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753245AbYAaOeX (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:34:23 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Qz42mnNLmDDqSxPsER/d1HoMwgx7l2Z79xPbZbjE0T4StWw75WhqWdITffZx/WaHHt1ZrvNfST+8zfU/WogaK4XMCIzciVltO58XUfo2oWSgx6xZbDKtwicYydTEgEJre/+xPBKx8uKbX6y/FizmQmhNhMX1Eq1oyC7Z6l640ts= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:34:17 +0100 From: "Bart Van Assche" To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" Subject: Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel Cc: "FUJITA Tomonori" , fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp, rdreier@cisco.com, James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, vst@vlnb.net, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1201785938.7280.105.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080130083239E.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20080130195635T.tomof@acm.org> <1201785938.7280.105.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1349 Lines: 26 On Jan 31, 2008 2:25 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > Since this particular code is located in a non-data path critical > section, the kernel vs. user discussion is a wash. If we are talking > about data path, yes, the relevance of DD tests in kernel designs are > suspect :p. For those IB testers who are interested, perhaps having a > look with disktest from the Linux Test Project would give a better > comparision between the two implementations on a RDMA capable fabric > like IB for best case performance. I think everyone is interested in > seeing just how much data path overhead exists between userspace and > kernel space in typical and heavy workloads, if if this overhead can be > minimized to make userspace a better option for some of this very > complex code. I can run disktest on the same setups I ran dd on. This will take some time however. Disktest is new to me -- any hints with regard to suitable combinations of command line parameters are welcome. The most recent version I could find on http://ltp.sourceforge.net/ is ltp-20071231. Bart Van Assche. -- 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/