From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 003.mia.mailroute.net (003.mia.mailroute.net [199.89.3.6]) (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 6A6587261C; Thu, 28 Aug 2025 13:32:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.3.6 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756387961; cv=none; b=MvDxCc9MjiCmaiidSJecx+4fquEt40/kxtwjHoX+K01CQVcfrik4/cureo65nranYbN+V5IXmNgQrcG3Ku/cGr2SjFsy8AhEuDKPGVAe8Fi9lMEyRyO+fCzUjbn8XJZV9JadAe6a8rT45EKkAL1y1OX7yPpFsPKhSKZVjl6remw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756387961; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OeKNbTw5D5uBCn/CUeyles28MY6Cqcp0NZN1ZxxsTW8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=sv6Z6SBSdLG8DLFn3RZCLocRuGlW4ShnxwVr+LGIPAgwVD4Uolunn/lpPnz1BMBvqHT1JQRvCE9HqSaH3aL2ZvY25kA42BXJ3bLaQSwrSMc5WtPofmH95sj6xkBiFG/X86nLrMq3bJWoGrUOxy01TYseU+O8DGCutxorYch9eR4= 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=DKJnsYkY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.3.6 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="DKJnsYkY" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 003.mia.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4cCMlV2kQwzlgqVc; Thu, 28 Aug 2025 13:32:38 +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=1756387956; x=1758979957; bh=+afyIWdnQS49DzHZvJJ1e6Fx Cvb+A3s5xWN45Dg3qq0=; b=DKJnsYkYSrnIOf6N6II4qRC5GxnLPbkpYsjfh4cM RM8dnf5HZBBaTt7Pk7fOUfivaY6uvlDKDtBDUbnvm9vo274q7nlIcwvDA/tBxdOW 9gOU3W+lXZPTLsdaUwMBFTsmATQdQXhGNbCNQmZaHcj03caxJ660+0xwEaM/ZNrE g53Wfto5MRbHyas+qNH6TDk6ZqGSPnol8RkoElrdGZK/YoYiQMc+8aFXv9QgFNR1 ICL3+7F4lsfysxT3POjSDv5ctjwPDo3wuF/aDLxmmTcEBR9PC8Dolm47rBno4tgo 0waAmwALegaOs94bd34wlnFDjrz2xr1lrai02jvSihcddw== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 003.mia.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (003.mia [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id So-d6UAwmtsz; Thu, 28 Aug 2025 13:32:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.20.6.188] (unknown [208.98.210.68]) (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 003.mia.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4cCMlN6hSpzlgqyg; Thu, 28 Aug 2025 13:32:32 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2025 06:32:26 -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 v24 00/18] Improve write performance for zoned UFS devices To: Hannes Reinecke , Jens Axboe Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Damien Le Moal References: <20250827212937.2759348-1-bvanassche@acm.org> 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 8/28/25 4:23 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > Before we're doing yet another round here, have you checked whether > the patchset from Yu Kuai ("PATCH RFC v2 00/10: block: fix disordered IO > in the case of recurse split") does help in your case, too? Hi Hannes, Thanks for having taken a look. Yu Kuai's patch series is independent of this patch series. The patch series "PATCH RFC v2 00/10: block: fix disordered IO in the case of recurse split" affects the order in which split bios are submitted by RAID drivers and by dm-linear. None of these drivers are used in the devices I care about (Android devices). This patch series increases IOPS for small writes whether or not the patch series "PATCH RFC v2 00/10: block: fix disordered IO in the case of recurse split" is applied. Does this answer your question? Bart.