lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] blk-throtl: make latency= absolute
Hello, Shaohua.

On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 03:12:12PM -0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> The percentage latency makes sense, but the absolute latency doesn't to me. A
> 4k IO latency could be much smaller than 1M IO latency. If we don't add
> baseline latency, we can't specify a latency target which works for both 4k and
> 1M IO.

It isn't adaptive for sure. I think it's still useful for the
following reasons.

1. The absolute latency target is by nature both workload and device
dependent. For a lot of use cases, coming up with a decent number
should be possible.

2. There are many use cases which aren't sensitive to the level where
they care much about the different between small and large
requests. e.g. protecting a managerial job so that it doesn't
completely stall doesn't require tuning things to that level. A
value which is comfortably higher than usually expected latencies
would often be enough (say 100ms).

3. It's also useful for verification / testing.

Thanks.

--
tejun

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-10 00:43    [W:0.091 / U:0.412 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site