linux-kernel - Re: severe regression with random I/O from (at least) 4.14?

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]

Date:   Thu, 21 Dec 2017 12:09:47 +0100
From:   Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
To:     linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        DAVIDE FERRARI <162996@...denti.unimore.it>
Subject: Re: severe regression with random I/O from (at least) 4.14?



> Il giorno 21 dic 2017, alle ore 11:57, Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org> ha scritto:
> 
> Hi,
> a few minutes ago I bumped into this apparent severe regression, with 4.15-rc4 and an SSD PLEXTOR PX-256M5S. If, with none as I/O scheduler, I do
> fio --name=global --rw=randread --size=512m --name=job1
> 
> I get
> read : io=524288KB, bw=34402KB/s, iops=8600, runt= 15240msec
> 
> This device had to reach at least 40 KIOPS. I retried with mq-deadline too, and then with a 4.14, same outcome in all cases. I asked some colleague to repeat the test with his/her device. Same outcome, so far, also with an SSD 850 EVO 250GB.
> 
> I'm sorry if I'm making some colossal mistake.
> 

Forget it, sorry. I was confused by a failed test where iodepth was higher than 1, and I am sleeping too little ...

Thanks,
Paolo

> Thanks,
> Paolo
> 
> 
>