Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/14] introduce the BFQ-v0 I/O scheduler as an extra scheduler | From | Bart Van Assche <> | Date | Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:05:11 -0700 |
| |
On 10/26/2016 04:34 AM, Jan Kara wrote: > On Wed 26-10-16 03:19:03, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> Just as last time: >> >> big NAK for introducing giant new infrastructure like a new I/O scheduler >> for the legacy request structure. >> >> Please direct your engergy towards blk-mq instead. > > Christoph, we will probably talk about this next week but IMO rotating > disks and SATA based SSDs are going to stay with us for another 15 years, > likely more. For them blk-mq is no win, relatively complex IO scheduling > like CFQ or BFQ does is a big win for them in some cases. So I think IO > scheduling (and thus place for something like BFQ) is going to stay with us > for quite a long time still. So are we going to add hooks in blk-mq to > support full-blown IO scheduling at least for single queue devices? Or how > else do we want to support that HW?
Hello Jan,
Having two versions (one for non-blk-mq, one for blk-mq) of every I/O scheduler would be a maintenance nightmare. Has anyone already analyzed whether it would be possible to come up with an API for I/O schedulers that makes it possible to use the same I/O scheduler for both blk-mq and the traditional block layer?
Bart.
| |