[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <721F90B0-837A-4EBE-90CA-35C88C2A57D3@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 19:22:08 +0100
From: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH BUGFIX/IMPROVEMENT 0/6] block, bfq: first bath of fixes
and improvements
> Il giorno 22 gen 2021, alle ore 19:19, Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org> ha scritto:
>
> Hi,
>
> about nine months ago, Jan (Kara, SUSE) reported a throughput
> regression with BFQ. That was the beginning of a fruitful dev&testing
> collaboration, which led to 18 new commits. Part are fixes, part are
> actual performance improvements.
>
The cover letter was not complete, sorry. Here is the missing piece:
Given the high number of commits, and the size of a few of them, I've
opted for splitting their submission into three batches. This is the
first batch.
Thanks,
Paolo
> Jia Cheng Hu (1):
> block, bfq: set next_rq to waker_bfqq->next_rq in waker injection
>
> Paolo Valente (5):
> block, bfq: use half slice_idle as a threshold to check short ttime
> block, bfq: increase time window for waker detection
> block, bfq: do not raise non-default weights
> block, bfq: avoid spurious switches to soft_rt of interactive queues
> block, bfq: do not expire a queue when it is the only busy one
>
> block/bfq-iosched.c | 100 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.20.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists