linux-kernel - Re: Understanding I/O behaviour

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <791963.30234.qm@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Jul 2007 05:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Martin Knoblauch <knobi@...bisoft.de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Understanding I/O behaviour

Brice Figureau wrote:

>> CFQ gives less (about 10-15%) throughput except for the kernel
>> with the
>> cfs cpu scheduler, where CFQ is on par with the other IO
>> schedulers.
>>
>
>Please have a look to kernel bug #7372:
>http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7372
>
>It seems I encountered the almost same issue.
>
>The fix on my side, beside running 2.6.17 (which was working fine
>for me) was to:
>1) have /proc/sys/vm/vfs_cache_pressure=1
>2) have /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio=1 and 
> /proc/sys/vm/dirty_background_ratio=1
>3) have /proc/sys/vm/swappiness=2
>4) run Peter Zijlstra: per dirty device throttling patch on the
> top of 2.6.21.5:
>http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0706.1/2776.html

Brice,

 any of them sufficient, or all together nedded? Just to avoid
confusion.

Cheers
Martin


------------------------------------------------------
Martin Knoblauch
email: k n o b i AT knobisoft DOT de
www:   http://www.knobisoft.de
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/