linux-kernel - the latency difference between deadline and CFQ

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

Message-ID: <AANLkTi=0h+wiU+Q0BXVtg_bFRch8vDgZ_Q7i7HBZkZD4@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:39:03 +0900
From:	NamJae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk
Subject: the latency difference between deadline and CFQ

Hi. Jens.

I heard that deadline worked great from a latency in comparison with CFQ.

How do I demonstrate why the latency of deadlinne is better than CFQ ?

And would you inform me weakness of CFQ in comparison with deadline ?

Thanks.
--
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/