linux-kernel - Re: Device or HBA level QD throttling creates randomness in sequetial workload

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20161024154123.GA7379@vader>
Date:   Mon, 24 Oct 2016 08:41:23 -0700
From:   Omar Sandoval <osandov@...ndov.com>
To:     Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@...adcom.com>
Cc:     linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, paolo.valente@...aro.org
Subject: Re: Device or HBA level QD throttling creates randomness in
 sequetial workload

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 06:35:01PM +0530, Kashyap Desai wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 05:43:35PM +0530, Kashyap Desai wrote:
> > > Hi -
> > >
> > > I found below conversation and it is on the same line as I wanted some
> > > input from mailing list.
> > >
> > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=147569860526197&w=2
> > >
> > > I can do testing on any WIP item as Omar mentioned in above
> discussion.
> > > https://github.com/osandov/linux/tree/blk-mq-iosched
> 
> I tried build kernel using this repo, but looks like it is not allowed to
> reboot due to some changes in <block> layer.

Did you build the most up-to-date version of that branch? I've been
force pushing to it, so the commit id that you built would be useful.
What boot failure are you seeing?

> >
> > Are you using blk-mq for this disk? If not, then the work there won't
> affect you.
> 
> YES. I am using blk-mq for my test. I also confirm if use_blk_mq is
> disable, Sequential work load issue is not seen and <cfq> scheduling works
> well.

Ah, okay, perfect. Can you send the fio job file you're using? Hard to
tell exactly what's going on without the details. A sequential workload
with just one submitter is about as easy as it gets, so this _should_ be
behaving nicely.

> >
> > > Is there any workaround/alternative in latest upstream kernel, if user
> > > wants to see limited penalty  for Sequential Work load on HDD ?
> > >
> > > ` Kashyap
> > >

P.S., your emails are being marked as spam by Gmail. Actually, Gmail
seems to mark just about everything I get from Broadcom as spam due to
failed DMARC.

-- 
Omar