[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1538582446.205649.22.camel@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2018 09:00:46 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Andreas Herrmann <aherrmann@...e.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.com>,
Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
'Paolo Valente' via bfq-iosched
<bfq-iosched@...glegroups.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: BFQ default for single queue devices
On Wed, 2018-10-03 at 17:55 +0200, Paolo Valente wrote:
> The problem, in particular, is that bfq is a complex beast, fighting
> against a jungle of I/O issues. You have to be really into bfq, even
> to just know all of its features!
This is a problem by itself. I don't know anyone who wants to have to deal
with I/O scheduler tunables.
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists