Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH BUGFIX/IMPROVEMENT 0/6] block, bfq: first bath of fixes and improvements | From | Paolo Valente <> | Date | Fri, 22 Jan 2021 19:22:08 +0100 |
| |
> Il giorno 22 gen 2021, alle ore 19:19, Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org> ha scritto: > > Hi, > > about nine months ago, Jan (Kara, SUSE) reported a throughput > regression with BFQ. That was the beginning of a fruitful dev&testing > collaboration, which led to 18 new commits. Part are fixes, part are > actual performance improvements. >
The cover letter was not complete, sorry. Here is the missing piece:
Given the high number of commits, and the size of a few of them, I've opted for splitting their submission into three batches. This is the first batch.
Thanks, Paolo
> Jia Cheng Hu (1): > block, bfq: set next_rq to waker_bfqq->next_rq in waker injection > > Paolo Valente (5): > block, bfq: use half slice_idle as a threshold to check short ttime > block, bfq: increase time window for waker detection > block, bfq: do not raise non-default weights > block, bfq: avoid spurious switches to soft_rt of interactive queues > block, bfq: do not expire a queue when it is the only busy one > > block/bfq-iosched.c | 100 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.20.1
| |