[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOsHCa0wyTtA65mGBB_8YM7vmQyvkTDcwwvELEEMJ5WKu2QNhw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 09:46:17 +0800
From: Xiuhong Wang <xiuhong.wang.cn@...il.com>
To: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
Cc: Xiuhong Wang <xiuhong.wang@...soc.com>, tj@...nel.org, josef@...icpanda.com,
axboe@...nel.dk, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, niuzhiguo84@...il.com, ke.wang@...soc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "blk-throttle: Fix IO hang for a corner case"
Hi Michal,
Remove this patch to make the code clearer and easier to understand.
Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com> 于2024年10月15日周二 00:45写道:
>
> Hello.
>
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 09:47:24AM GMT, Xiuhong Wang <xiuhong.wang@...soc.com> wrote:
> > This reverts commit 5b7048b89745c3c5fb4b3080fb7bced61dba2a2b.
> >
> > The throtl_adjusted_limit function was removed after
> > commit bf20ab538c81 ("blk-throttle: remove
> > CONFIG_BLK_DEV_THROTTLING_LOW"), so the problem of not being
> > able to scale after setting bps or iops to 1 will not occur.
> > So revert this commit that bps/iops can be set to 1.
>
> What is the use case where the difference between 1 or 2 matters?
> (Unless this is meant as a cleanup, then it makes sense to me.)
>
> Thanks
> Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists