linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: 韩磊 <bonben1989@gmail.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: A thought about IO scheduler in linux kernel for SSD
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 10:20:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131025082043.GA1418@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK2Ky6xjz5htYdYp9rpfWt1fyK+3oc+i1nR9GWh_hyULpZ=QMg@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri 25-10-13 11:10:22, 韩磊 wrote:
> 2013/10/23 Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>:
> > On Wed 23-10-13 08:47:44, 韩磊 wrote:
> >> Nowadays,the IO schedulers in linux kernel have four types:
> >>
> >> deadline,noop,Anticiptory and CFQ.CFQ is the default scheduler.But CFQ is
> >> not a good scheduler for SSD,dealine may be a good choice.
> >
> >   That doesn't make much sense to me. If there are two bios in flight for
> > some sector, results are undefined. Thus we usually avoid such situation
> > (usually we want to have defined contents of the disk :). The exclusion is
> > usually achieved at higher level using page locking etc. So adding code
> > speeding up such requests doesn't seem worth it.
> >
> >                                                                 Honza
> > --
> > Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> > SUSE Labs, CR
> 
> Do you mean that the probability of two bios have the same start
> sector in request list at this level is very low?
  Yes, that's exactly what I mean. As Ming Lei notes, there are ways how it
could happen (most notably any direct IO user can generate arbitrary number
of bios with the same start sectors). But in none of these cases
performance matters, it is usually a bug in application if that happens.

							Bye
								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-25  8:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-23  0:47 A thought about IO scheduler in linux kernel for SSD 韩磊
2013-10-23 10:59 ` Jan Kara
2013-10-25  3:10   ` 韩磊
2013-10-25  8:20     ` Jan Kara [this message]
2013-10-25  4:02   ` Ming Lei
2013-10-25  5:00     ` 韩磊
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-10-22 13:44 韩磊
2013-10-22 13:40 韩磊

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 \
    --in-reply-to=20131025082043.GA1418@quack.suse.cz \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=bonben1989@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).