linux-kernel - Re: [patch v11 0/6] support concurrent sync io for bfq on a specail occasion

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]

Date:   Tue, 25 Oct 2022 15:31:07 +0800
From:   Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
To:     Paolo VALENTE <paolo.valente@...more.it>,
        Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
        "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [patch v11 0/6] support concurrent sync io for bfq on a specail
 occasion

在 2022/10/25 14:34, Paolo VALENTE 写道:

>>
>> I rerun the manually test for 5 times, here is the average result:
>>
>> without this patchset / with this patchset:
>>
>> | --------------- | ------------- | ------------ | -------------- | ------------- | -------------- |
>> | cg1 weight      | 10            | 20           | 30             | 40          | 50             |
>> | cg2 weight      | 90            | 80           | 70             | 60          | 50             |
>> | cg1 bw MiB/s    | 21.4 / 21.74  | 42.72 / 46.6 | 63.82 / 61.52  | 94.74 / 90.92 | 140 / 138.2    |
>> | cg2 bw MiB/s    | 197.2 / 197.4 | 182 / 181.2  | 171.2 / 173.44 | 162 / 156.8   | 138.6 / 137.04 |
>> | cg2 bw / cg1 bw | 9.22 / 9.08   | 4.26 / 3.89  | 2.68 / 2.82    | 1.71 / 1.72   | 0.99 / 0.99    |
> 
> Great!  Results are (statistically) the same, with and without your
> patchset.  For me your patches are ok.  Thank you very much for this
> contribution, and sorry again for my delay.
> 
> Acked-by: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>

Thanks for the review, it's nice to get this done finally!
> 
> Thanks,
> Paolo