From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261693AbUEFGex (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2004 02:34:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261718AbUEFGex (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2004 02:34:53 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:25823 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261693AbUEFGew (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2004 02:34:52 -0400 Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 23:34:26 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Jens Axboe Cc: kenneth.w.chen@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Cache queue_congestion_on/off_threshold Message-Id: <20040505233426.704926da.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20040506062028.GB10069@suse.de> References: <200405052212.i45MC0F28121@unix-os.sc.intel.com> <20040506062028.GB10069@suse.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jens Axboe wrote: > > Do you have any numbers at all for this? I'd say these calculations are > severly into the noise area when submitting io. The difference will not be measurable, but I think the patch makes sense regardless of what the numbers say. I uninlined the new function though. Two callsites, both slowpath...