Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-176449-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240509023937.1090421-1-zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
 <20240509023937.1090421-3-zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com> <Zjw_0UPKvGkPfKFO@casper.infradead.org>
 <CAGWkznGZP3KUBN2M6syrjTmVOdSM0zx23hcJ6+hqE8Drgz2f-A@mail.gmail.com> <Zj2R_UH0JMspexp5@casper.infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <Zj2R_UH0JMspexp5@casper.infradead.org>
From: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 15:35:09 +0800
Message-ID: <CAGWkznHX3OBeMh7-jvAP1HyVaT=TN6Fs2ArUCkUHtE3nVadaDA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm: introduce budgt control in readahead
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, 
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>, 
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org, 
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, steve.kang@unisoc.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 11:18=E2=80=AFAM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.or=
g> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 10:43:20AM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> > Thanks for the prompt. I did some basic research on soft RAID and
> > wonder if applying the bps limit on /dev/md0 like below could make
> > this work.
>
> No.  Look at btrfs' raid support, for example.  it doesn't use md0.
If I understand the below command correctly, btrfs uses one of the
volumes within RAID as the mount block device, not /dev/md0. However,
I think this is a problem of blkio.throttle rather than this commit
which means this readahead budget control will work accordingly as
long as blkio.throttle's parameter is configured correctly(eg. 50/50
on sdb and sdc)

mkfs.btrfs -m raid0 -d raid0 /dev/sdb /dev/sdc
mount -t btrfs /dev/sdb /mnt/btr


>
> > I didn't find information about 'RAID internally'. Could we set the
> > limit on the root device(the one used for mount) to manage the whole
> > partition without caring about where the bio finally goes? Or ask the
> > user to decide if to use by making sure the device they apply will not
> > do RAID?
>
> No.