Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758119AbZFVPnW (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:43:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757857AbZFVPm5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:42:57 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:57121 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757358AbZFVPm4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:42:56 -0400 From: Jeff Moyer To: Vivek Goyal Cc: Balbir Singh , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, jens.axboe@oracle.com, nauman@google.com, dpshah@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, ryov@valinux.co.jp, fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, taka@valinux.co.jp, guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com, dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, righi.andrea@gmail.com, m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com, jbaron@redhat.com, agk@redhat.com, snitzer@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC] IO scheduler based io controller (V5) References: <1245443858-8487-1-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> <20090621152116.GC3728@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090622153030.GA15600@redhat.com> X-PGP-KeyID: 1F78E1B4 X-PGP-CertKey: F6FE 280D 8293 F72C 65FD 5A58 1FF8 A7CA 1F78 E1B4 X-PCLoadLetter: What the f**k does that mean? Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:40:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090622153030.GA15600@redhat.com> (Vivek Goyal's message of "Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:30:31 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1342 Lines: 46 Vivek Goyal writes: > On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 08:51:16PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: >> * Vivek Goyal [2009-06-19 16:37:18]: >> >> > >> > Hi All, >> > >> > Here is the V5 of the IO controller patches generated on top of 2.6.30. >> [snip] >> >> > Testing >> > ======= >> > >> >> [snip] >> >> I've not been reading through the discussions in complete detail, but >> I see no reference to async reads or aio. In the case of aio, aio >> presumes the context of the user space process. Could you elaborate on >> any testing you've done with these cases? >> > > Hi Balbir, > > So far I had not done any testing with AIO. I have done some just now. > Here are the results. > > Test1 (AIO reads) > ================ > Set up two fio, AIO read jobs in two cgroup with weight 1000 and 500 > respectively. I am using cfq scheduler. Following are some lines from my test > script. > > =================================================================== > fio_args="--ioengine=libaio --rw=read --size=512M" AIO doesn't make sense without O_DIRECT. Cheers, Jeff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/