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:	Thu, 14 Apr 2016 06:03:14 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	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" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 09/22] block, cfq: replace CFQ with the BFQ-v0 I/O
 scheduler

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 03:54:22PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 09:39:47AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> > Btw, can someone explain why you guys waste so much time hacking and
> > arguing about a legacy codebase (old request code and I/O schedulers)
> > that everyone would really like to see disappear.  Why don't you
> > spend your time on blk-mq where you have an entirely clean slate
> > for scheduling?

> idk, are we gonna duplicate a full disk scheduler on blk-mq path?  I
> think it'd be more sensible to make blk-mq call into the old elevator
> path for scheduling IOs on rotating rusts.

It's not just rust, it's also lower end solid state devices.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)