Re: [PATCH] speed up SATA

From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Date: Sun Mar 28 2004 - 13:24:11 EST

On Sunday 28 of March 2004 20:12, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> 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?

Yep, user-tunable per-device policies with sane driver defaults.

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