Re: [PATCH] cfq-iosched: non-rot devices do not need read queue merging

[Jeff Moyer]

Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Thanks Jeff, one thing comes to mind. Now with recent changes, we drive deeper
> depths on SSD with NCQ and there are not many pending cfqq on service tree
> until and unless number of parallel threads exceed NCQ depth (32). If
> that's the case, then I think we might not be seeing lot of queue merging
> happening in this test case until and unless dump utility is creating more
> than 32 threads.
>
> If time permits, it might also be interesting to run the same test with queue
> depth 1 and see if SSDs without NCQ will suffer or not.

Corrado, I think what Vivek is getting at is that you should check for
both blk_queue_nonrot and cfqd->hw_tag (like in cfq_arm_slice_timer).
Do you agree?

Cheers,
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/