From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5A32C433DB for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 22:17:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A594A61A21 for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 22:17:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232403AbhCXWQp (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Mar 2021 18:16:45 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38704 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232263AbhCXWQ1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Mar 2021 18:16:27 -0400 Received: from mail-il1-x132.google.com (mail-il1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::132]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44FBBC06174A for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 15:16:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x132.google.com with SMTP id c17so442225ilj.7 for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 15:16:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=t4EAKLGlDBPqsHkx1Hf+LwBirXN7TSbNjZM26FU5ENQ=; b=s1PJqso1IqkVkrwVukI13CpEc9iae9MvjXoellXiUf6p4FGz1GGBEfWikSkWEMmUBz C6jpP+qYXoHW/dnRyszg74E7QZyBTl8ZDWrjoKM1a1pCxTN+T2aUvF4QbhfGQ7VAmhOs 9Mo+CkGCXSNXqbYYMuAHcr5dA1XGFvpN90RKJNDFDiZ7PDn8Y7v6bCG3Ez/6UyJQdCLh aIqQFSLH8CWC2LMaYmMF9MvT/ZrwmOsQJKEFwj1arfJeb075S7D7TM0JlR30PMUtkVMc VVbd33sti933hk/B/yZxTyINd4sRiiTN7nYkfHLVK2/FX9oSfFnBFSQnXG/rLIFDsjYo sbeA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=t4EAKLGlDBPqsHkx1Hf+LwBirXN7TSbNjZM26FU5ENQ=; b=e7sEOPNEXfknOYZkPl7snpa7BdzPVuKEozGYBi67bSZC3eSeCe1S0YUXMJmEp6tkSY ohrEgMcDTgNn1GEXLOlLGwzhvG/LDF7EKy6pVx2d6Om7MeR2F2gUFvVdriIOqkmNbnZQ 1iFssg7ZwX9yquYG6masQWgDQu2XZMqtGU+mV7c5S8fLCN4vpKybmyLnZfCYYNYMiFwf rurbsJzlmfJG+NCmQn0jwYqgYC3q6m4BkeOO49dkhCfKuY+e8tkx6WLx+HWtc/kJV667 97Sh7Q/zdpaedPqxodXe48TPanj0xYt1A1U/O8KMjpYQ/Q7YoIBYq/dIufcj9ULgXIlK 5urQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530F+0ErwW4PXBrprIdA6gLBtMgbhw6vtOZcDF4pfSKeLN2LJgu0 i3aEqP6DE0z0dycVADh5hvHKzg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzSNKLsvpcNVsuw4iE/jlLoEFJWRHH2F0qxnP4QmmzLbOTaXDA/LSwZ+pffg0ROo9RVTXvnbw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:de2:: with SMTP id m2mr4432672ilj.274.1616624186387; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 15:16:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.30] ([65.144.74.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a14sm1718460ilm.68.2021.03.24.15.16.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Mar 2021 15:16:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [RFC] iosched: add cfq -> bfq alias To: Xose Vazquez Perez , Oleksandr Natalenko Cc: Paolo Valente , BLOCK ML , Omar Sandoval References: <7962131d-12c5-0862-483f-e8873cac8ba0@gmail.com> <20210307192634.xdq52ntb2sxc34mh@spock.localdomain> <6dc9784e-9eb3-6f99-9200-7f39a91fc180@gmail.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <85fec70c-e908-7828-503a-59f313bb454a@kernel.dk> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 16:16:25 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6dc9784e-9eb3-6f99-9200-7f39a91fc180@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 3/24/21 4:10 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: > On 3/7/21 8:26 PM, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote: > >> Hmmm NACK. >> >> CFQ and BFQ are completely different beasts. >> >> If you are going to tune BFQ to match old CFQ behaviour (somehow; I >> don't know why one would do this, how one would do this and whether it >> is possible at all), you for sure have enough time to fix your old udev >> rules and scripts. >> >> If you are just tolerating default BFQ behaviour, you should explicitly >> acknowledge it by amending your rules and scripts. For personal systems >> this is not a big deal. For enterprise systems you better do it NOW so >> that another person that comes to work on those systems in 10 years >> after you resign knows what and why was done. >> >> If you are just lazy (no offence! I don't know your real intention >> here), I'm not sure we are going to hide such an indifference behind >> another aliasing kludge. >> >> Thanks. >> > > You are writing a lot, and say nothing. > > bfq is the natural choice coming from cfq. There is NO other option. > > Still waiting... for a valid *technical* response against my change. Let's lay off the aggression a bit, it's not helpful. They are two very different schedulers. Yes, they support some of the same options, but they really have nothing in common outside of that. On top of that, it's also very late to introduce a change like that, it should've been done with the introduction of it. > Or do you prefer to apply the below patch?. Not a valid example, as mq-deadline and deadline are identical, one just supports multiple queues. -- Jens Axboe