linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 09/22] block, cfq: replace CFQ with the BFQ-v0 I/O scheduler

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]

Date:	Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:04:29 -0500
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Fabio Checconi <fchecconi@...il.com>,
	Arianna Avanzini <avanzini.arianna@...il.com>,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ulf.hansson@...aro.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 09/22] block, cfq: replace CFQ with the BFQ-v0 I/O
 scheduler

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 04:02:09PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> I personally find very little value in them but there are definitely
> people who care about them judging by the patches I get when they go out
> of sync.

idk, istr this coming up some months ago and there really weren't good
arguments for furthering out-of-line generated docs.  I'm sure there
are people building and checking for errors but that doesn't indicate
the actual usefulness or that we shouldn't move away from it.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun