Re: [BK PATCHES] add ata scsi driver
From: Linus Torvalds (torvalds@transmeta.com)
Date: Mon May 26 2003 - 15:53:29 EST
On Mon, 26 May 2003, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> I know this is a pet peeve of yours (must be, I remember you bringing it
> up at least 3 time before :), but I don't think that's necessarily true.
> It shouldn't matter _one_ bit whether you leave the request there or
> not, it's unmergeable.
It's not the merging that I worry about. It's latency and starvation.
Think of it this way: if you keep feeding a disk requests, and the disk
always tries to do the closest one (which is a likely algorithm), you can
easily have a situation where the disk _never_ actually schedules a
request that is at one "end" of the platter.
Think of all the fairness issues we've had in the elevator code, and
realize that the low-level disk probably implements _none_ of those
fairness algorithms.
> As long as the io scheduler keeps track of this (and it does!) we are
> golden.
Hmm.. Where does it keep track of request latency for requests that have
been removed from the queue?
Linus
-
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/