linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] blk-throttle: support io merge over iops

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z9CQOuJA-bo4xZkH@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 09:34:18 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, axboe@...nel.dk, josef@...icpanda.com,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com,
	"yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-throttle: support io merge over iops_limit

Hello,

On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 11:08:00AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
...
> > That said, I'm not sure about changing the behavior now. blk-throtl has
> > mostly used the number of bios as long as it has existed and given that
> > there can be a signficant difference between the two metrics, I'm not sure
> > the change is justified at this point.
> 
> If we really concern about the behavior change, can we consider a new
> flag that can switch to the old behavior? We'll see if any user will
> complain.

Yeah, that may be the right way to go about this, but let me turn this
around and ask you why adding a new behavior would be a good idea. What
problems are you trying to solve?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun