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: <4888F93F-D58D-48DD-81A6-A6D61C452D92@unimore.it>
Date:	Wed, 4 Jun 2014 12:24:30 +0200
From:	Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...more.it>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
	Fabio Checconi <fchecconi@...il.com>,
	Arianna Avanzini <avanzini.arianna@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BFQ speed tests [was Re: [PATCH RFC - TAKE TWO - 00/12] New version of the BFQ I/O Scheduler]


Il giorno 04/giu/2014, alle ore 12:03, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> ha scritto:

> Hi!
> 
>> Should this attempt be useless as well, I will, if you do not mind, try by asking you more details about your system and reproducing your configuration as much as I can.
>> 
> 
> Try making BFQ the default scheduler. That seems to break it for me,
> when selected at runtime, it looks stable.
> 
> Anyway, here are some speed tests. Background load:
> 
> root@duo:/data/tmp# echo cfq > /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler 
> root@duo:/data/tmp# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
> root@duo:/data/tmp# cat /dev/zero > delme; cat /dev/zero > delme;cat
> /dev/zero > delme;cat /dev/zero > delme;cat /dev/zero > delme;cat
> /dev/zero > delme
> 
> (Machine was running out of disk space.)
> 
> (I alternate between cfq and bfq).
> 
> Benchmark. I chose git describe because it is part of kernel build
> sometimes .. and I actually wait for that.
> 
> pavel@duo:/data/l/linux-good$ time git describe
> warning: refname 'HEAD' is ambiguous.
> v3.15-rc8-144-g405dedd
> 
> Unfortunately, results are not too good for BFQ. (Can you replicate
> the results?)
> 
> # BFQ
> 10.24user 1.62system 467.02 (7m47.028s) elapsed 2.54%CPU
> # CFQ
> 8.55user 1.26system 69.57 (1m9.577s) elapsed 14.11%CPU
> # BFQ
> 11.70user 3.18system 1491.59 (24m51.599s) elapsed 0.99%CPU
> # CFQ, no background load
> 8.51user 0.75system 30.99 (0m30.994s) elapsed 29.91%CPU
> # CFQ
> 8.70user 1.36system 74.72 (1m14.720s) elapsed 13.48%CPU
> 

Definitely bad, we are about to repeat the test …

Thanks,
Paolo

> 									Pavel
> -- 
> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


--
Paolo Valente                                                 
Algogroup
Dipartimento di Fisica, Informatica e Matematica		
Via Campi, 213/B
41125 Modena - Italy        				  
homepage:  http://algogroup.unimore.it/people/paolo/

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ