Re: bio_chain: proposed solution for bio_alloc failure and large IO simplification

From: William Lee Irwin III (
Date: Fri Jun 14 2002 - 18:29:43 EST

On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 04:00:52PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Everything is pretty much in place to do this now. The main piece
> which is missing is the gang page allocator (Hi, Bill).
> It'll be damn fast, and nicely scalable. It's all about reducing the
> L1 cache footprint. Making best use of data when it is in cache.
> Making best use of locks once they have been acquired. If it is
> done right, it'll be almost as fast as 64k PAGE_CACHE_SIZE, with
> none of its disadvantages.
> In this context, bio_chain() is regression, because we're back
> into doing stuff once-per-page, and longer per-page call graphs.
> I'd rather not have to do it if it can be avoided.

gang_cpu is not quite ready to post, but work is happening on it
and it's happening today -- I have a suitable target in hand and
am preparing it for testing. The bits written thus far consist of
a transparent per-cpu pool layer refilled using the gang transfer
mechanism, and I'm in the process of refining that to non-prototypical
code and extending it with appropriate deadlock avoidance so explicit
gang allocation requests can be satisfied.

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 15 2002 - 22:00:32 EST