Re: [PATCH] speed up SATA

From: William Lee Irwin III
Date: Sun Mar 28 2004 - 13:16:03 EST

On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 07:54:36PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Sorry, but I cannot disagree more. You think an artificial limit at the
> block layer is better than one imposed at the driver end, which actually
> has a lot more of an understanding of what hardware it is driving? This
> makes zero sense to me. Take floppy.c for instance, I really don't want
> 1MB requests there, since that would take a minute to complete. And I
> might not want 1MB requests on my Super-ZXY storage, because that beast
> completes io easily at an iorate of 200MB/sec.
> So you want to put this _policy_ in the block layer, instead of in the
> driver. That's an even worse decision if your reasoning is policy. The
> only such limits I would want to put in, are those of the bio where
> simply is best to keep that small and contained within a single page to
> avoid higher order allocations to do io. Limits based on general sound
> principles, not something that caters to some particular piece of
> hardware. I absolutely refuse to put a global block layer 'optimal io
> size' restriction in, since that is the ugliest of policies and without
> having _any_ knowledge of what the hardware can do.

How about per-device policies and driver hints wrt. optimal io?

-- wli
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at