Re: [PATCH 3/3] bfq: Use only idle IO periods for think time calculations

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed 22-07-20 11:13:28, Paolo Valente wrote:
> > a) I don't think adding these samples to statistics helps in any way (you
> > cannot improve the prediction power of the statistics by including in it
> > some samples that are not directly related to the thing you try to
> > predict). And think time is used to predict the answer to the question: If
> > bfq queue becomes idle, how long will it take for new request to arrive? So
> > second and further requests are simply irrelevant.
> > 
> 
> Yes, you are super right in theory.
> 
> Unfortunately this may not mean that your patch will do only good, for
> the concerns in my previous email. 
> 
> So, here is a proposal to move forward:
> 1) I test your patch on my typical set of
>    latency/guaranteed-bandwidth/total-throughput benchmarks
> 2) You test your patch on a significant set of benchmarks in mmtests
> 
> What do you think?

Sure, I will queue runs for the patches with mmtests :).

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux