linux-kernel - Re: Regarding dm-ioband tests

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: <20090904.101222.226781140.ryov@valinux.co.jp>
Date:	Fri, 04 Sep 2009 10:12:22 +0900 (JST)
From:	Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@...inux.co.jp>
To:	vgoyal@...hat.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Regarding dm-ioband tests

Hi Vivek,

Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 01:47:24PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 12:50:11PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > Hi Ryo,
> > > 
> > > I decided to play a bit more with dm-ioband and started doing some
> > > testing. I am doing a simple two dd threads doing reads and don't seem
> > > to be gettting the fairness. So thought will ask you what's the issue
> > > here. Is there an issue with my testing procedure.
> > > 
> > > I got one 40G SATA drive (no hardware queuing). I have created two
> > > partitions on that disk /dev/sdd1 and /dev/sdd2 and created two ioband
> > > devices ioband1 and ioband2 on partitions sdd1 and sdd2 respectively. The
> > > weights of ioband1 and ioband2 devices are 200 and 100 respectively. 
> > > 
> > > I am assuming that this setup will create two default groups and IO
> > > going to partition sdd1 should get double the BW of partition sdd2.
> > > 
> > > But it looks like I am not gettting that behavior. Following is the output
> > > of "dmsetup table" command. This snapshot has been taken every 2 seconds
> > > while IO was going on. Column 9 seems to be containing how many sectors
> > > of IO has been done on a particular io band device and group. Looking at
> > > the snapshot, it does not look like that ioband1 default group got double
> > > the BW of ioband2 default group.  
> > > 
> > > Am I doing something wrong here?
> > > 
> > 
> 
> Hi Ryo,
> 
> Did you get a chance to look into it? Am I doing something wrong or it is
> an issue with dm-ioband.

Sorry, I missed it. I'll look into it and report back to you.

Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta
--
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/