linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: BFQ default for single queue devices

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]

Message-ID: <20181004074535.GB6682@linux-x5ow.site>
Date:   Thu, 4 Oct 2018 09:45:35 +0200
From:   Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>, aherrmann@...e.com,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        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>, mgorman@...e.com,
        Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@...aro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        bfq-iosched@...glegroups.com, oleksandr@...alenko.name,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: BFQ default for single queue devices

On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 03:25:54PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 03-10-18 08:53:37, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 8:29 AM Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > So, I do understand your need for conservativeness, but, after so much
> > > evidence on single-queue devices, and so many years! :), what's the
> > > point in keeping Linux worse for virtually everybody, by default?
> > 
> > I understand if we need to ease things in as well, I don't intend this
> > change for the current merge window or anything, since v4.19
> > will notably have this patch:
> > 
> > commit d5038a13eca72fb216c07eb717169092e92284f1
> > Author: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>
> > Date:   Wed Jul 4 10:53:56 2018 +0200
> > 
> >     scsi: core: switch to scsi-mq by default
> > 
> >     It has been more than one year since we tried to change the default from
> >     legacy to multi queue in SCSI with commit c279bd9e406 ("scsi: default to
> >     scsi-mq"). But due to issues with suspend/resume and performance problems
> >     it had been reverted again with commit cbe7dfa26eee ("Revert "scsi: default
> >     to scsi-mq"").
> > 
> >     In the meantime there have been a substantial amount of performance
> >     improvements and suspend/resume got fixed as well, thus we can re-enable
> >     scsi-mq without a significant performance penalty.
> > 
> >     Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>
> >     Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>
> >     Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
> >     Acked-by: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
> >     Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
> > 
> > I guess that patch can be a bit scary by itself. But IIUC it all went
> > fine this time!
> > 
> > But hey, if that works, that means $SUBJECT patch will enable BFQ on all
> > libata devices and any SCSI that is single queue as well, not just
> > "obscure" stuff like MMC/SD and UBI, and that is
> > indeed a massive crowd of legacy devices. But we're talking
> > v4.21 here.
> > 
> > Johannes, you might be interested in $SUBJECT patch.
> > It'd be nice to hear what SUSE people have to add, since they
> > are pretty proactive in this area.
> 
> So we do have a udev rules in our distro which sets the IO scheduler based
> on device parameters (rotational at least, with blk-mq we might start
> considering number of queues as well, plus we have some exceptions like
> virtio, loop, etc.). So the kernel default doesn't concern us too much as a
> distro.
> 
> I personally would consider bfq a safer default for single-queue devices
> (loop probably needs exception) but I don't feel too strongly about it.

[Full quote for context]

What about resurrecting CONFIG_DEFAULT_IOSCHED for MQ as well and
leave it default to mq-deadline but give bfq, kyber and none as a
choice as well?

The question is shall we only do it for single queue devices or for
native MQ devices as well if we go down that road?

I understand the embedded floks will want a different interface than
udev, but from the non-embedded point of view I'm with Jens and Jan
here, let udev do the job.

      Johannes
-- 
Johannes Thumshirn                                          Storage
jthumshirn@...e.de                                +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850