linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] block/mq-deadline: Prioritize first request

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:   Sun, 24 Jul 2022 18:48:44 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     Wang You <wangyoua@...ontech.com>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, fio@...r.kernel.org, hch@....de,
        jaegeuk@...nel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ming.lei@...hat.com,
        wangxiaohua@...ontech.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] block/mq-deadline: Prioritize first request

On 7/23/22 03:59, Wang You wrote:
> Also, can I ask? If using fio or other tools, how should testing be done to get
> more accurate and convincing data? Such as the perfectly sequential and random I/O
> performance you mentioned above (fio's multi-threaded test does result in neither
> perfectly sequential nor perfectly random, but single thread dispatch is too slow,
> and cannot play the merge and sorting ability of elv).

I'm not sure that there is agreement about for which data patterns to 
measure performance to conclude that certain code changes improve 
performance of an I/O scheduler.

Thanks,

Bart.