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  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, 13 Jun 2019 07:46:12 +0200
From:   Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
To:     "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa@...il.mit.edu>
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>,
        Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        amakhalov@...are.com, anishs@...are.com, srivatsab@...are.com,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: CFQ idling kills I/O performance on ext4 with blkio cgroup
 controller



> Il giorno 12 giu 2019, alle ore 00:34, Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa@...il.mit.edu> ha scritto:
> 
> On 6/2/19 12:04 AM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> On 5/30/19 3:45 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>> 
> [...]
>>> At any rate, since you pointed out that you are interested in
>>> out-of-the-box performance, let me complete the context: in case
>>> low_latency is left set, one gets, in return for this 12% loss,
>>> a) at least 1000% higher responsiveness, e.g., 1000% lower start-up
>>> times of applications under load [1];
>>> b) 500-1000% higher throughput in multi-client server workloads, as I
>>> already pointed out [2].
>>> 
>> 
>> I'm very happy that you could solve the problem without having to
>> compromise on any of the performance characteristics/features of BFQ!
>> 
>> 
>>> I'm going to prepare complete patches.  In addition, if ok for you,
>>> I'll report these results on the bug you created.  Then I guess we can
>>> close it.
>>> 
>> 
>> Sounds great!
>> 
> 
> Hi Paolo,
> 

Hi

> Hope you are doing great!
> 

Sort of, thanks :)

> I was wondering if you got a chance to post these patches to LKML for
> review and inclusion... (No hurry, of course!)
> 


I'm having troubles testing these new patches on 5.2-rc4.  As it
happened with the first release candidates for 5.1, the CPU of my test
machine (Intel Core i7-2760QM@...0GHz) is so slowed down that results
are heavily distorted with every I/O scheduler.

Unfortunately, I'm not competent enough to spot the cause of this
regression in a feasible amount of time.  I hope it'll go away with
next release candidates, or I'll test on 5.1.

> Also, since your fixes address the performance issues in BFQ, do you
> have any thoughts on whether they can be adapted to CFQ as well, to
> benefit the older stable kernels that still support CFQ?
> 

I have implanted my fixes on the existing throughput-boosting
infrastructure of BFQ.  CFQ doesn't have such an infrastructure.

If you need I/O control with older kernels, you may want to check my
version of BFQ for legacy block, named bfq-sq and available in this
repo:
https://github.com/Algodev-github/bfq-mq/

I'm willing to provide you with any information or help if needed.

Thanks,
Paolo


> Thank you!
> 
> Regards,
> Srivatsa
> VMware Photon OS


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists