linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm: introduce budgt control in readahead

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: <CAGWkznHX3OBeMh7-jvAP1HyVaT=TN6Fs2ArUCkUHtE3nVadaDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 15:35:09 +0800
From: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, 
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>, 
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, steve.kang@...soc.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm: introduce budgt control in readahead

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 11:18 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 10:43:20AM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> > Thanks for the prompt. I did some basic research on soft RAID and
> > wonder if applying the bps limit on /dev/md0 like below could make
> > this work.
>
> No.  Look at btrfs' raid support, for example.  it doesn't use md0.
If I understand the below command correctly, btrfs uses one of the
volumes within RAID as the mount block device, not /dev/md0. However,
I think this is a problem of blkio.throttle rather than this commit
which means this readahead budget control will work accordingly as
long as blkio.throttle's parameter is configured correctly(eg. 50/50
on sdb and sdc)

mkfs.btrfs -m raid0 -d raid0 /dev/sdb /dev/sdc
mount -t btrfs /dev/sdb /mnt/btr



>
> > I didn't find information about 'RAID internally'. Could we set the
> > limit on the root device(the one used for mount) to manage the whole
> > partition without caring about where the bio finally goes? Or ask the
> > user to decide if to use by making sure the device they apply will not
> > do RAID?
>
> No.