From: Christian Loehle <[email protected]>
To: Bart Van Assche <[email protected]>, Qais Yousef <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce per-task io utilization boost
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 12:06:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 21/03/2024 19:52, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 3/21/24 10:57, Christian Loehle wrote:
>> In the long-term it looks like for UFS the problem will disappear as we are
>> expected to get one queue/hardirq per CPU (as Bart mentioned), on NVMe that
>> is already the case.
>
> Why the focus on storage controllers with a single completion interrupt?
> It probably won't take long (one year?) until all new high-end
> smartphones may have support for multiple completion interrupts.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
Apart from going to "This patch shows significant performance improvements on
hardware that runs mainline today" to "This patch will have significant
performance improvements on devices running mainline in a couple years"
nothing in particular.
I'm fine with leaving it with having acknowledged the problem.
Maybe I would just gate the task placement on the task having been in
UFS (with multiple completion interrupts) or NVMe submission recently to
avoid regressions to current behavior in future versions. I did have that
already at some point, although it was a bit hacky.
Anyway, thank you for your input on that, it is what I wanted to hear!
Kind Regards,
Christian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-25 12:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-04 20:16 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce per-task io utilization boost Christian Loehle
2024-03-04 20:16 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Introduce per-task io util boost Christian Loehle
2024-03-25 3:30 ` Qais Yousef
2024-03-04 20:16 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] cpufreq/schedutil: Remove iowait boost Christian Loehle
2024-03-18 14:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-03-18 16:40 ` Christian Loehle
2024-03-18 17:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-03-19 13:58 ` Christian Loehle
2024-03-25 2:37 ` Qais Yousef
2024-04-19 13:42 ` Christian Loehle
2024-04-29 11:18 ` Qais Yousef
2024-05-07 15:19 ` Christian Loehle
2024-05-12 15:29 ` Qais Yousef
2024-03-05 0:20 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce per-task io utilization boost Bart Van Assche
2024-03-05 9:13 ` Christian Loehle
2024-03-05 18:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-03-06 10:49 ` Christian Loehle
2024-03-21 12:39 ` Qais Yousef
2024-03-21 17:57 ` Christian Loehle
2024-03-21 19:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-03-25 12:06 ` Christian Loehle [this message]
2024-03-25 17:23 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-03-25 2:53 ` Qais Yousef
2024-03-22 18:08 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-03-25 2:20 ` Qais Yousef
2024-03-25 17:18 ` Christian Loehle
2024-03-25 12:24 ` Christian Loehle
2024-03-28 10:09 ` Vincent Guittot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox