Re: Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?

From: Chuck Ebbert (76306.1226@compuserve.com)
Date: Mon Apr 14 2003 - 20:19:31 EST

Next message: Hui: "Re: 2.5.67-mm3"
Previous message: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.5.67-mm3"
Maybe in reply to: Timothy Miller: "Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?"
Next in thread: Nick Piggin: "Re: Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?"
Reply: Nick Piggin: "Re: Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> If RAID1 can use the generic elevator then it should. I
> guess it can't though.

No, but it is feeding IO requests into the elevators of the
block devices below it. For a given read, all it wants to do
is pick one device to handle the work. If it could look into
the queues maybe it could make better decisions.

--
 Chuck
-
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/

Next message: Hui: "Re: 2.5.67-mm3"
Previous message: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.5.67-mm3"
Maybe in reply to: Timothy Miller: "Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?"
Next in thread: Nick Piggin: "Re: Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?"
Reply: Nick Piggin: "Re: Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 15 2003 - 22:00:34 EST