From: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@suse.de>
Organization: suse.de
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] aio: avoid using queue_delayed_work in aio_kick_handler to schedule itself
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:20:27 +0530
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.51 (KDE/4.0.4; ; )
Cc: linux-aio@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>, Zach Brown <zach.brown@oracle.com>
References: <200806260927.27995.knikanth@suse.de> <x49prq3t43a.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <x49prq3t43a.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200806301120.27743.knikanth@suse.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 883
Lines: 28

On Friday 27 June 2008 18:41:37 Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@suse.de> writes:
> > Avoid using queue_delayed_work in aio_kick_handler() to run itself
> > immediately. Instead use aio_run_all_iocbs()
>
> Can you give some rationale for this change?  Also, how did you test it?
>

The comment in aio_kick_handler(), "we're in a worker thread already, don't 
use queue_delayed_work" triggered me to do this. Ran multiple instances 
of Stephen Hemminger's aio cp for basic testing.

I think this would make it unfair between different kioctx? May be only the 
comment should be removed? 

Thanks
Nikanth Karthikesan


--
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/