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=-10.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 D4685C432BE for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 08:33:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABAA360F92 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 08:33:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232688AbhH0Idx (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2021 04:33:53 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52046 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231824AbhH0Idw (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2021 04:33:52 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com (mail-wr1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::434]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EA18C061757 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 01:33:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id u16so9190728wrn.5 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 01:33:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=VtoCWVqLTV/heRDzLkHFfB6NsN56tLaUOwMyBzk6DsQ=; b=p/XqSfnZUooWAr8lgDeoBRdn3K1+CVOMlLcHv640+uENvSRHmZHL/Jgt4NXBeRRIQU 9S6RPb4u0xmPpipOcWiNh7NacH3f3BaGFhl8BBDRVL2cylmQ205R5dzp4/iEci705arm eeXKeDNPCjU/T0lcP0GWvReSEMchHGSqNrjwY3Q5vpumbt1rClmdOUI4ZSdtFPX2aZm1 mQdRkS3hP+lKNWwYmOJTM7wLs/I1e1Q3EgJVBWBxRqOIIDDkkKGQsaE5YYf8lSOs9i4a LOSebZMZ+Yylt+8h7WM1IMps85gmmCfO5RAcc2gh3nnfpdPWCNuAGvkDAIBujwTDFrq/ 38Ww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=VtoCWVqLTV/heRDzLkHFfB6NsN56tLaUOwMyBzk6DsQ=; b=PrpvfbJpKrE+sGtS+nYBK2kqH8qk1+C+o84KV9NbSQxfGCVRL7dxZTmk0YwFYwZQ1x Xkw60j9bCU3ppuM53KpOaS+3NJVIBNY6IIYoYoEkbseFMLb47cH3gcUqkRVx1XNpxMqf +PAnyRDxevnLbiHQdyzsGNHgx65UYUdkie2kvO+4zO6ISAJhVZqaAxW1Qn8FmQjXCTn6 SW7mRmUTTciW57dz+GzG4HLv3zFz+tCKYVZ/pzWZmn/NrQ6QfqP5YVNznDim/SZ7JI6y A9aDFGs9s3Yq9fo1S6Tq98HFeEPNvH0Ztiy9s9vGMmbGK41TLj4fkmjGVT12dJ6DxG/H Z8WA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531h7OkLFpC2T9S4BeVTkjWAHEPAI1aVSdQEqKC6ZlA2qA5Vp3qS FZOWaL3UBAFzSQ88LkfBxVuDSg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxVx6afc47YInNnteHGfK0p5HZ4m/TugBVCsf93N3hJ3wlglrcgrmLCRpLOttrbzg2VTuJiIA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:d081:: with SMTP id y1mr8969546wrh.148.1630053182963; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 01:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.13] ([83.216.184.132]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h11sm12269724wmc.23.2021.08.27.01.33.02 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 27 Aug 2021 01:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) Subject: Re: BFQ cgroup weights range From: Paolo Valente In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 10:33:01 +0200 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Michal_Koutn=C3=BD?= , Jens Axboe , linux-block , Jan Kara , cgroups@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <72DB38C2-196C-4F55-B1A1-B8EA55667057@linaro.org> References: <20210824105626.GA11367@blackbody.suse.cz> <20210826131212.GE4520@blackbody.suse.cz> To: Tejun Heo X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org > Il giorno 26 ago 2021, alle ore 19:25, Tejun Heo ha = scritto: >=20 > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 03:12:12PM +0200, Michal Koutn=C3=BD wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 02:51:47PM +0200, Paolo Valente = wrote: >>> BFQ inherited these constants when we forked it from CFQ. I'm ok = with >>> increasing max weight to 10000. I only wonder whether this would >>> break some configuration, as the currently maximum weight would not = be >>> the maximum weight any longer. >>=20 >> Thanks for the reply. Let me form the idea as a patch (and commit >> message) and discuss based on that if needed (+ccrosspost into = cgroups >> ML). >>=20 >> -- >8 -- >> From: Michal Koutn=C3=BD >> Subject: [PATCH] block, bfq: Accept symmetric weight adjustments >>=20 >> The allowed range for BFQ weights is currently 1..1000 with 100 being >> the default. There is no apparent reason to not accept weight >> adjustments of same ratio on both sides of the default. This change >> makes the attribute domain consistent with other cgroup (v2) knobs = with >> the weight semantics. >>=20 >> This extension of the range does not restrict existing configurations >> (quite the opposite). This may affect setups where weights >1000 were >> attempted to be set but failed with the default 100. Such cgroups = would >> attain their intended weight now. This is a changed behavior but it >> rectifies the situation (similar intention to the commit 69d7fde5909b >> ("blkcg: use CGROUP_WEIGHT_* scale for io.weight on the unified >> hierarchy") for CFQ formerly (and v2 only)). >>=20 >> Additionally, the changed range does not imply all IO workloads can = be >> really controlled to achieve the widest possible ratio 1:10^4. >>=20 >> Signed-off-by: Michal Koutn=C3=BD >=20 > Looks fine to me. >=20 > Acked-by: Tejun Heo >=20 Acked-by: Paolo Valente Thanks for this improvement, Paolo > Thanks. >=20 > --=20 > tejun From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Valente Subject: Re: BFQ cgroup weights range Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 10:33:01 +0200 Message-ID: <72DB38C2-196C-4F55-B1A1-B8EA55667057@linaro.org> References: <20210824105626.GA11367@blackbody.suse.cz> <20210826131212.GE4520@blackbody.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=VtoCWVqLTV/heRDzLkHFfB6NsN56tLaUOwMyBzk6DsQ=; b=p/XqSfnZUooWAr8lgDeoBRdn3K1+CVOMlLcHv640+uENvSRHmZHL/Jgt4NXBeRRIQU 9S6RPb4u0xmPpipOcWiNh7NacH3f3BaGFhl8BBDRVL2cylmQ205R5dzp4/iEci705arm eeXKeDNPCjU/T0lcP0GWvReSEMchHGSqNrjwY3Q5vpumbt1rClmdOUI4ZSdtFPX2aZm1 mQdRkS3hP+lKNWwYmOJTM7wLs/I1e1Q3EgJVBWBxRqOIIDDkkKGQsaE5YYf8lSOs9i4a LOSebZMZ+Yylt+8h7WM1IMps85gmmCfO5RAcc2gh3nnfpdPWCNuAGvkDAIBujwTDFrq/ 38Ww== In-Reply-To: List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" To: Tejun Heo Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Michal_Koutn=C3=BD?= , Jens Axboe , linux-block , Jan Kara , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > Il giorno 26 ago 2021, alle ore 19:25, Tejun Heo ha = scritto: >=20 > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 03:12:12PM +0200, Michal Koutn=C3=BD wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 02:51:47PM +0200, Paolo Valente = wrote: >>> BFQ inherited these constants when we forked it from CFQ. I'm ok = with >>> increasing max weight to 10000. I only wonder whether this would >>> break some configuration, as the currently maximum weight would not = be >>> the maximum weight any longer. >>=20 >> Thanks for the reply. Let me form the idea as a patch (and commit >> message) and discuss based on that if needed (+ccrosspost into = cgroups >> ML). >>=20 >> -- >8 -- >> From: Michal Koutn=C3=BD >> Subject: [PATCH] block, bfq: Accept symmetric weight adjustments >>=20 >> The allowed range for BFQ weights is currently 1..1000 with 100 being >> the default. There is no apparent reason to not accept weight >> adjustments of same ratio on both sides of the default. This change >> makes the attribute domain consistent with other cgroup (v2) knobs = with >> the weight semantics. >>=20 >> This extension of the range does not restrict existing configurations >> (quite the opposite). This may affect setups where weights >1000 were >> attempted to be set but failed with the default 100. Such cgroups = would >> attain their intended weight now. This is a changed behavior but it >> rectifies the situation (similar intention to the commit 69d7fde5909b >> ("blkcg: use CGROUP_WEIGHT_* scale for io.weight on the unified >> hierarchy") for CFQ formerly (and v2 only)). >>=20 >> Additionally, the changed range does not imply all IO workloads can = be >> really controlled to achieve the widest possible ratio 1:10^4. >>=20 >> Signed-off-by: Michal Koutn=C3=BD >=20 > Looks fine to me. >=20 > Acked-by: Tejun Heo >=20 Acked-by: Paolo Valente Thanks for this improvement, Paolo > Thanks. >=20 > --=20 > tejun