linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] IO scheduler based IO controller V6

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: <4A6EE2BF.9040803@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Jul 2009 19:36:31 +0800
From:	Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com, nauman@...gle.com, dpshah@...gle.com,
	lizf@...fujitsu.com, mikew@...gle.com, fchecconi@...il.com,
	paolo.valente@...more.it, ryov@...inux.co.jp,
	fernando@....ntt.co.jp, s-uchida@...jp.nec.com, taka@...inux.co.jp,
	jmoyer@...hat.com, dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, righi.andrea@...il.com,
	m-ikeda@...jp.nec.com, jbaron@...hat.com, agk@...hat.com,
	snitzer@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] IO scheduler based IO controller V6

Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 10:10:34AM +0800, Gui Jianfeng wrote:
>> Hi，
>>
>> Here are some fio test results for IO Controller V6 built and not built.
>> Iozone test results are also attached.
>>
> 
> Hi Gui,
> 
> Thanks a lot for some performance numbers. It seems to be a mixed chart.
> Performance gains at some places and loss at others. I am curious about
> that -7.0% for normal writes. Not sure what can contribute to that.
> 
> What was the value of "fairness" parameter when you ran those tests? Can you
> please set fairness = 0 and re-run the tests (if you have already not done so).
> 
> By default fairness is set to 1 in V6. With fairness = 0, we should be very
> close to existing CFQ behavior. If not, then we need to dive deeper and
> see why variations are happening.

  Hi Vivek,

  I tested with default fairness value, i'll re-test it when fairness is set to 0.

> 
> Is it also possible to run the same tests with V7. 

  Sure.

-- 
Regards
Gui Jianfeng

--
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/