linux-kernel - Re: [patch v2 0/8]block: An IOPS based ioscheduler

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1327971040.21268.24.camel@sli10-conroe>
Date:	Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:50:40 +0800
From:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
To:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc:	axboe@...nel.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, david@...morbit.com,
	jack@...e.cz, zhu.yanhai@...il.com, namhyung.kim@....com
Subject: Re: [patch v2 0/8]block: An IOPS based ioscheduler

On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 10:30 -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 03:02:13PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > An IOPS based I/O scheduler
> > 
> > Flash based storage has some different characteristics against rotate disk.
> > 1. no I/O seek.
> > 2. read and write I/O cost usually is much different.
> > 3. Time which a request takes depends on request size.
> > 4. High throughput and IOPS, low latency.
> 
> Hi Shaohua,
> 
> Last time we agreed that you will try to extend CFQ iops mode to take care
> of this case. I was wondering that if that idea is out of the window?
I felt there is complexity to do the merge and mess code even with
wrapping some functions as you suggested. Another thing is I want to
avoid complexity of CFQ, for example allocating queue and sharing it
between tasks. cfq_set_request is one source that queue_lock gets
contented, making the code simple can avoid such contention.

> Also what's the real workload where this is going to benefit us. I had
> struggled to run something which drove constantly deep queue depths to
> get the fairness without idling.
To be honest, I don't have real workload. Our test environment runs some
micro benchmarks, which has some problems. I thought we all agreed CFQ
has some limitations. Hoping somebody having real workload can have a
look.

Thanks,
Shaohua

--
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/