From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757443Ab3BKOWH (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:22:07 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:28813 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757129Ab3BKOWF (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:22:05 -0500 From: Jeff Moyer To: Kent Overstreet Cc: Jens Axboe , Tejun Heo , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, zab@redhat.com, bcrl@kvack.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, tytso@mit.edu, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/32] Generic dynamic per cpu refcounting References: <1356573611-18590-1-git-send-email-koverstreet@google.com> <1356573611-18590-26-git-send-email-koverstreet@google.com> <20130208144408.GY2875@htj.dyndns.org> <20130208144902.GQ15092@kernel.dk> <20130208212706.GH27179@google.com> X-PGP-KeyID: 1F78E1B4 X-PGP-CertKey: F6FE 280D 8293 F72C 65FD 5A58 1FF8 A7CA 1F78 E1B4 X-PCLoadLetter: What the f**k does that mean? Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:21:48 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20130208212706.GH27179@google.com> (Kent Overstreet's message of "Fri, 8 Feb 2013 13:27:06 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Kent Overstreet writes: > On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 03:49:02PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: [...] >> I'd feel a lot better deferring the whole aio/dio performance series for >> one merge window. There's very little point in rushing it, and I don't >> think it's been reviewed/tested enough yet. > > It could probably use more review, but it has been sitting in linux-next > and the issues that showed up there are all fixed. You going to help > review it? :) > > I'm not really set on it going in this merge cycle, but testing wise I > do think it's in pretty good shape and I'm not sure where we're going to > get more testing from before it goes in. > > And Andrew - apologies for not getting you the benchmarks you asked for, > getting hardware for it has turned out to be more troublesome than I > expected. Still don't know what's going on with that. I'll try to get some benchmarking numbers for this patch set. -Jeff