linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] range-bw: Another I/O scheduling policy of dm-ioband supporting the predicable I/O bandwidth (range bandwidth)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2891419e0905150000x5f19908eh975c83690f38b9ac@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 May 2009 16:00:00 +0900
From:	Dong-Jae Kang <baramsori72@...il.com>
To:	Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@...inux.co.jp>
Cc:	righi.andrea@...il.com, menage@...gle.com,
	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, agk@...rceware.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, axboe@...nel.dk, chlunde@...g.uio.no,
	dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, dpshah@...gle.com, eric.rannaud@...il.com,
	fernando@....ntt.co.jp, taka@...inux.co.jp, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
	matt@...ehost.com, dradford@...ehost.com, ngupta@...gle.com,
	randy.dunlap@...cle.com, roberto@...it.it, s-uchida@...jp.nec.com,
	subrata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, yoshikawa.takuya@....ntt.co.jp,
	nauman@...gle.com, fchecconi@...il.com, paolo.valente@...more.it,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, corsetproject@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] range-bw: Another I/O scheduling policy of dm-ioband 
	supporting the predicable I/O bandwidth (range bandwidth)

Hi, Ryo.

Sorry for late reply.

2009/5/12 Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@...inux.co.jp>:
> Hi Dong-Jae,
>> >> after bug-fix,I evaluated range-bw according to your configuration and
>> >> test environment
>> >> the result is in new relesed range-bw mail, [PATCH 0/2]
>> >> and more detailed documentation is also available and it can be
>> >> referred in [PATCH 1/2]
>> >>
>> >> Ryo,
>> >> can you check the result ?
>
> I did the same test as before and got the results as expected.
>
>               cgroup1    cgroup2
>  min:max-bw    0:100      0:200
>  -------------------------------------
>  read          100         197
>  write         103         198 [KB/s]
>

I think upper result is reasonable.
because you configured min and  max bandwidth as 0K:100K(for cgroup1)
and 0K:200K(for cgroup2).
So, range-bw supported appropriate and expected bandwidth with 1~3% error range.
minimum bandwidth was satisfied (0K, 0K ) and maximum bandwidth was
limited (100K, 200K)
but there is some considered point in use of range-bw as I described
in [PATCH 0/2] as below.

* Attention
-----------------
Range-BW supports the predicable I/O bandwidth, but it should be
configured in the scope of total I/O bandwidth of the I/O system to
guarantee the minimum I/O requirement. For example, if total I/O
bandwidth is 40Mbytes/sec, the summary of I/O bandwidth configured in
each process group should be equal or smaller than 40Mbytes/sec.
So, we need to check total I/O bandwidth before set it up.

If you need more another information about range-bw, reply to me.

> I got errors while applying your patch, some lines are wrapped with
> carriage returns.
>
>    +extern int policy_range_bw_init(struct ioband_device *dp, int argc,
>  >> char **argv);

Thank you for bug reporting
I will check it again.

>
> Thanks,
> Ryo Tsuruta
>



-- 
Best Regards,
Dong-Jae Kang
--
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/