linux-ext4 - Re: CFQ idling kills I/O performance on ext4 with blkio cgroup controller

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]

Message-ID: <ebe43a35-87d3-11c6-5928-3f90055367ed@csail.mit.edu>
Date:   Wed, 22 May 2019 03:02:25 -0700
From:   "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa@...il.mit.edu>
To:     Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        jmoyer@...hat.com, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        amakhalov@...are.com, anishs@...are.com, srivatsab@...are.com
Subject: Re: CFQ idling kills I/O performance on ext4 with blkio cgroup
 controller

On 5/22/19 2:12 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> 
>> Il giorno 22 mag 2019, alle ore 11:02, Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa@...il.mit.edu> ha scritto:
>>
>>
>> Let's continue here on LKML itself.
> 
> Just done :)
> 
>> The only reason I created the
>> bugzilla entry is to attach the tarball of the traces, assuming
>> that it would allow me to upload a 20 MB file (since email attachment
>> didn't work). But bugzilla's file restriction is much smaller than
>> that, so it didn't work out either, and I resorted to using dropbox.
>> So we don't need the bugzilla entry anymore; I might as well close it
>> to avoid confusion.
>>
> 
> No no, don't close it: it can reach people that don't use LKML.  We
> just have to remember to report back at the end of this.

Ah, good point!

>  BTW, I also
> think that the bug is incorrectly filed against 5.1, while all these
> tests and results concern 5.2-rcX.
> 

Fixed now, thank you for pointing out!
 
Regards,
Srivatsa
VMware Photon OS