From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 008.lax.mailroute.net (008.lax.mailroute.net [199.89.1.11]) (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 5F59E5EE8D; Wed, 4 Sep 2024 17:17:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725470244; cv=none; b=nADQnODREbexdtZY4xJChyan3M65lxTJwY5L2jE/uAh6dPin+/J4hEpnsX05PGtUItDemphIaGwY1pWwBRauAe1cb6KZfhOTLa7fE7+QKPixrQrsNbKDYnudMbOTfEilyDfistCbwpPDoyIiIXq/EgHilYL/ehAxaCmhOUhuuVo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725470244; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LRXV9Q0dFTBf2mdXNPCxnch8TO71ErFZVKpeSFu/W8I=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=SOju7PpuZO5yzdq0GPAoYA/xpoxaJrZfNupVZknocjeDFTnMTjcYh5L1+B/tGN72KyQQTCpM1fHzCEJyi/bZ7hHYni7Cpzg8oV9avci4u2jTly8MWKz19ckhKfKOMpn6iZhbsClzPi5qPjZ/FJ10swq8tyzsPGhJ2a/2Be6UQMY= 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=Otv2TYlt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.11 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="Otv2TYlt" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 008.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4WzTh24Qq1z6ClY8n; Wed, 4 Sep 2024 17:17:22 +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=1725470237; x=1728062238; bh=LRXV9Q0dFTBf2mdXNPCxnch8 TO71ErFZVKpeSFu/W8I=; b=Otv2TYltZtmCvIltxmhaan4a2MKRFpvHBoG/3BJc xcjmyBfDUb9+RaVft5CkyZ/HUVtpTHbUZYaMjbaykJCkOp67XSh4lzl31ENHf/0e I7m9ajBIUDUFsrbyExUMivRLXmeucohh/NJUIgxsK4ukuHai2NjpkOMnvUZPwlL/ wYzwj3qeMOJBH8CCY4eUofU6y9gxATARcjNXcR9FhgdncHnPGkyiSOBazcp+/BUj Tt3owaaJ8Oze1BtVWjzacMbRQMEqX7X3ukmQ2Vv1Y4+1LcVCh0kAiwipLVgCjWG/ 2ZK4tCmhPrADRg+t+TnkFzfPB5Xn1mp/O6g8ZvyyMTE/Mw== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 008.lax.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (008.lax [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id NOWhUI4Vb90D; Wed, 4 Sep 2024 17:17:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [100.66.154.22] (unknown [104.135.204.82]) (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 008.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4WzTgs5MbBz6ClbJB; Wed, 4 Sep 2024 17:17:13 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 10:17:11 -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> <80732d0d-e1a6-8b5e-791d-7c8a8091159a@huaweicloud.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <80732d0d-e1a6-8b5e-791d-7c8a8091159a@huaweicloud.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 9/3/24 7:45 PM, Yu Kuai wrote: > =E5=9C=A8 2024/09/04 10:28, Bart Van Assche =E5=86=99=E9=81=93: >> 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. >=20 > I'm confused now, I think keep maintaining BFQ won't stop you from > adding new functionality to another scheduler, right? Is this something > that all scheduler have to support? As long as the BFQ I/O scheduler does not get deprecated, there will be Android device vendors that select it for their devices. BFQ bug reports are either sent to one of my colleagues or to myself. For Android devices that use UFS storage, we noticed that the mq-deadline scheduler is good enough. The device boot time is shorter and I'm not aware of any significant differences in application startup time. Thanks, Bart.