Re: [PATCH 21/32] fs/aio: aio_wq isn't used in memory reclaim path

[Benjamin LaHaise]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 09:50:57AM -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > Yeap.  Do you agree that the concurrency limit is necessary?  If not,
> > we can just put everything onto system_wq.
> 
> I'm not sure whether it's strictly necessary (there may very well be a
> need for this in the usb gadgetfs code), but keeping it the same at
> least seems safe.

Limiting concurrency on aio requests is exactly the opposite of what the 
usb gadgetfs requires.  It's similarly bad for filesystem aio when there's 
a mix of small and large requests in flight.

		-ben
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/