From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 009.lax.mailroute.net (009.lax.mailroute.net [199.89.1.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EF91443D; Wed, 4 Sep 2024 02:28:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725416932; cv=none; b=pwYUzrvF9/+1Xis+xsTbXI+Oh7qkse4tmYJ2QB3escDRh6Suxw5/lhGZ9f4BWeSbE1pn4+pxVyTxdvEBKpFfhVaOhtsNVzo09kaRMbBGLkvbT4IMJarHDy+PeNtJ2W1CzrNhBT08Ng+DfmkDpUUcQE2eWopnP04VuxA26lMXUgg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725416932; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qdT2t2Fh9wwW5di1GdgWy0N/m4zZU4E2brtOKXqJf0I=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=EZxAe9QJ+HwFKYkWrdIKLUgvy7cm63DuzrFzOMtqfBGps5k3nc5TOFMv2iW0x2KOuwFUIk6wlvM8obBjXWoiZL/v28VmazLJRTsZ0rkIWWs6qptzHlJ+2+JILAvdJmAM0B8dS+bjf7Uvelk6YU6WbFGKNZH6d/qt3iLvlv0CIOo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b=sz6yBN84; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b="sz6yBN84" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 009.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Wz5yp3k5KzlgTWR; Wed, 4 Sep 2024 02:28:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=acm.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :from:from:content-language:references:subject:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mr01; t=1725416927; x=1728008928; bh=qdT2t2Fh9wwW5di1GdgWy0N/ m4zZU4E2brtOKXqJf0I=; b=sz6yBN84vV6Wz6VnnnubSfMr9ZvarqGglN/3TPVo qiju0AftR9KK2cHdwSmlZaITxKawLBPGBUb4x9q3yv5mbEs02smqB26co2MsOKR5 droWAATfmhP6RthQwe365eL8FBB9vk51Cjae5Z/Z1o0yUDJISRoqqQU0axgV3pzL IoecpCIDKsvQNWFcWIN7jJMLuoi+/KJDWt7eSuLIpkxqkg/racA5X+NO+0ae47V2 GUbj4GAkd6a8HvGp9omwRM0k7OQzt4AaI+UbEL4GlyymHouXYNAYyG1h84ue9IZ3 d7yU9L54DSMoQU5/YrODMN2ZTXmmkgWt7yBsn6jCV/5RPg== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 009.lax.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (009.lax [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id ps6vhR84Oy8n; Wed, 4 Sep 2024 02:28:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.51.14] (c-73-231-117-72.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.231.117.72]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bvanassche@acm.org) by 009.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Wz5yh58hLzlgTWP; Wed, 4 Sep 2024 02:28:44 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 19:28:42 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH for-6.12 0/4] block, bfq: fix corner cases related to bfqq merging To: Yu Kuai , Jens Axboe , jack@suse.cz, tj@kernel.org, josef@toxicpanda.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, mauro.andreolini@unimore.it, avanzini.arianna@gmail.com Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com, yangerkun@huawei.com, "yukuai (C)" References: <20240902130329.3787024-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> <2ee05037-fb4f-4697-958b-46f0ae7d9cdd@kernel.dk> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 9/3/24 6:32 PM, Yu Kuai wrote: > We do have customers are using bfq in downstream kernels, and we are > still running lots of test for bfq. It may take less time to add any missing functionality to another I/O scheduler rather than to keep maintaining BFQ. If Android device vendors would stop using BFQ, my job would become easier. Thanks, Bart.