linux-kernel - [PATCH 3/3] Mention that the util-linux package provides an ionice command.

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: <201111281624.34217.ms@teamix.de>
Date:	Mon, 28 Nov 2011 16:24:33 +0100
From:	Martin Steigerwald <ms@...mix.de>
To:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Mention that the util-linux package provides an ionice  command.

Am Montag, 28. November 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
> Hi jens und Vivek,
> 
> Vivek, I cc'd you, cause you wrote the new cfq-iosched.txt.
> 
> 
> In trying to understand how I/O priorities actually really work, I tried to
> dd with
> 
> rm nullen-id ; sync ; /usr/bin/time ionice -c3 dd if=/dev/zero of=nullen-id
> count=500 bs=1M conv=fsync
> 
> versus
> 
> rm nullen-rl; sync ; /usr/bin/time ionice -c1 -n0 dd if=/dev/zero
> of=nullen-rl count=500 bs=1M conv=fsync
> 
> concurrently. No differences. At first I was puzzled, then I thought maybe
> direct I/O makes a difference. So I tried with oflag=direct.
> 
> And it does.
> 
> Then I actually read the documentation block/ioprio.txt (3.1 here):
> > With the introduction of cfq v3 (aka cfq-ts or time sliced cfq), basic io
> > priorities are supported for reads on files.  This enables users to io
> > nice processes or process groups, similar to what has been possible with
> > cpu scheduling for ages.  This document mainly details the current
> > possibilities with cfq; other io schedulers do not support io priorities
> > thus far.
> 
> According to it I/O priorities will even only work on reads. Is that
> correct? I mean they do work on reads, I tested it, but *only* on reads?
> 
> From what I see here, it also works for direct I/O write requests
> 
> So from what I conclude is that CFQ I/O priorities work for all requests
> that are issued via synchronous system calls, but not for those issued via
> asynchronous calls, i. e. everything that goes through the pagecache.
> 
> Is that correct?
> 
> 
> Vivek, one thing on cfq-iosched.txt: Could slice_idle=0 make sense on SSDs?
> Later on you write that there are some SSD optimizations in place that cut
> down idling already.

And mentioned that ionice is available from the util-linux package:


>From 182d2e06d65ea784c2bbf2e756ce0452fdebef8c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Martin Steigerwald <ms@...mix.de>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 16:16:33 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Mention that the util-linux package provides an ionice
 command.

---
 Documentation/block/ioprio.txt |    3 +++
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/block/ioprio.txt b/Documentation/block/ioprio.txt
index 4775a95..5b79a29 100644
--- a/Documentation/block/ioprio.txt
+++ b/Documentation/block/ioprio.txt
@@ -58,6 +58,9 @@ For a running process, you can give the pid instead:
 
 will change pid 100 to run at the realtime scheduling class, at priority 2.
 
+The util-linux package includes an ionice command that basically works like
+described here.
+
 ---> snip ionice.c tool <---
 
 #include <stdio.h>
-- 
1.7.7.3

Thanks,
-- 
Martin Steigerwald - teamix GmbH - http://www.teamix.de
gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90
--
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/