Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752938Ab0BVMjj (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:39:39 -0500 Received: from swm.pp.se ([212.247.200.143]:50938 "EHLO uplift.swm.pp.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751186Ab0BVMji (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:39:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:39:37 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: disk/crypto performance regression 2.6.31 -> 2.6.32 (mmap problem?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 877 Lines: 21 On Fri, 19 Feb 2010, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > I have a system with 8 gigs of ram, c2d 2.4GHz and md > raid6->crypto->lvm/lv->xfs that I've had for quite a while. It used to be > raid5, but with 2.6.32 I was able to restripe it into a raid6. This is not a 2.6.32 regression, the behaviour is similar in 2.6.31 I have verified during the weekend. It seems iostat isn't really able to see exactly where the bottleneck is, and my guess right now is that it's indeed the md raid6 layer that is causing my performance problems, even though it doesn't look like it in iostat. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se -- 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/