Re: [PATCH BUGFIX/IMPROVEMENT 0/6] block, bfq: first bath of fixes and improvements

[Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>]

> Il giorno 22 gen 2021, alle ore 19:19, Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org> ha scritto:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> about nine months ago, Jan (Kara, SUSE) reported a throughput
> regression with BFQ. That was the beginning of a fruitful dev&testing
> collaboration, which led to 18 new commits. Part are fixes, part are
> actual performance improvements.
> 

The cover letter was not complete, sorry. Here is the missing piece:

Given the high number of commits, and the size of a few of them, I've
opted for splitting their submission into three batches. This is the
first batch.

Thanks,
Paolo

> Jia Cheng Hu (1):
>  block, bfq: set next_rq to waker_bfqq->next_rq in waker injection
> 
> Paolo Valente (5):
>  block, bfq: use half slice_idle as a threshold to check short ttime
>  block, bfq: increase time window for waker detection
>  block, bfq: do not raise non-default weights
>  block, bfq: avoid spurious switches to soft_rt of interactive queues
>  block, bfq: do not expire a queue when it is the only busy one
> 
> block/bfq-iosched.c | 100 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> 
> --
> 2.20.1