linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 00/22] Replace the CFQ I/O Scheduler with BFQ

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 1 Sep 2016 10:39:46 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Omar Sandoval <osandov@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 00/22] Replace the CFQ I/O Scheduler with BFQ

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:

>  - Do some benchmarks on the current status of the various branches on
>    relevant hardware (including trying to convert some of these slower
>    devices to blk-mq and seeing what happens).  Linus has been working
>    on this already in the context of MMC.

I'm trying to do a patch switching MMC to use blk-mq, so I can
benchmark performance before/after this.

While we expect mq to perform worse on single-hardware-queue
devices like these, we don't know until we tried, so I'm trying.

Yours,
Linus Walleij