Re: Playing with BFQ

Il giorno 16 mag 2017, alle ore 15:38, Sedat Dilek =

[off-list ref] ha scritto:

=20
[...]
=20

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

What about those two (Kconfig) patches which is in your current
bfq-4.11.y patchset.
=20

=20
I'm not sure I fully understand the purpose of the two patches you
propose (in your following emails).  The first patch seems to move =

BFQ

quoted

quoted

quoted

config options to a different position in Kconfig.iosched, but the
position of those items should be irrelevant.  Am I missing =

something?

quoted

quoted

quoted

The second patch seems to have to do with configuration bits of bfq
for blk, yet such a bfq version is not available in mainline.
=20
In any case, for possible new submissions, you should inline your
patches.  For complete instructions on submitting patches, have a =

look

quoted

quoted

quoted

at Documentation/process/submitting-patches
=20

=20
All my testings was done with your patchset against Linux v4.11.y.
You have the same kconfig/kbuild stuff in your 0001 patch [1], so =

:-)?

quoted

quoted

What you have in 0001 is missing in Linux v4.12-rc1.
Not sure if this is intended.

=20
4.12-rc1 contains bfq for blk-mq, while the patch you mention is for
bfq for blk (never accepted in mainline).  Maybe you could get a
clearer idea by having a look at the commits that add bfq (for =

blk-mq)

quoted

in 4.12-rc1.
=20

=20
I recall, Markus pointed me to that difference between the BFQ =

implementations.

For testing purposes: You want people to test BFQ in Linux v4.12?
=20

That would be awesome.  For the moment, I would be very happy even if
it just didn't crash!

Thanks,
Paolo

- Sedat -
=20

quoted

Hope this helps,
Paolo
=20

quoted

I will re-submit and add a "4.12" in the subject-line when I am at =

home.

quoted

quoted

=20
- Sedat -
=20
[1] =

http://algo.ing.unimo.it/people/paolo/disk_sched/patches/4.11.0-v8r11/0001=
-block-cgroups-kconfig-build-bits-for-BFQ-v7r11-4.11..patch

quoted

=20